Skip to main content

Full text of "Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society"

See other formats







' r "' 


f: m\ 


I n' 

















Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 



Committee of Publication. 

[April to June, 1907.] 


[October, 1907, to June, 1908.] 



^atjptutfe historical Sw% 

Third Semes. — Vol. I. 


1907, 1908. 

Publish at tfje Charge of tfje amaterston Publishing JFtmU. 



®liuijfrsttg Press: 
John Wilson and Son, Cambridge. 



The minutes of twelve stated meetings of the Society, 
from April 1907, to June, 1908, both included, are com- 
prised in this volume of the Proceedings. Those of the 
first three, April, May, and June, 1907, were prepared by 
Charles C. Smith, before his resignation on October 1, 
1907, as Editor of the Society's publications; Julius H. 
Tuttle, as acting editor, prepared the minutes of the 
remaining nine meetings and supervised their passage 
through the press. Mr. Smith served as Editor for nearly 
eighteen years ; also, during the same period, he was the 
working member of the Publishing Committee. A recog- 
nition of his services appears in the following pages, part 
of the proceedings of the November meeting. Mr. Smith 
w r as also a member of publishing committees, from 1867 
to 1882, and from 1889 to 1907, more than thirty-two 
years altogether; the longest record of such service in 
the history of the Society. His associate member of the 
committee, the Rev. Dr. McKenzie, served upon it for 
more than twenty-four years, the longest continuous 

The following are among the original communications 
in this volume: an Address by the President at the 


unveiling in the Dowse Library, at the June meeting, 1907, 
of the bust of Robert C. Win throp, President of the Society 
from 1855 to 1885, a companion to the bust of James 
Savage, President from 1841 to 1855, unveiled at the 
April meeting, 1906 ; a paper on President Lincoln's offer 
of a military command, in 1861, to Garibaldi; also one 
on the visits of Miles Standish to Boston Harbor in 1621 
and 1623 : a paper by Mr. Mead protesting against the 
proposed change of name of Maverick Square, East Boston, 
eliciting another paper, by the President, on the disregard 
of historical associations in the changes of names of streets 
and squares in Boston : a paper on the Separation of 
Maine from Massachusetts by Mr. Stanwood : one by 
John D. Long on a Reference to W. H. Seward in 
Schurz's Reminiscences, which, at a later meeting, elicited 
a Memorandum by the President on the same subject : 
a paper by Mr. Mead on John Cotton's Farewell Sermon 
to Winthrop's Company at Southampton : one by Mr. 
Matthews on Documents in a file of the Boston News- 
Letter (1711-1715) in the Boston Athenseum : a com- 
munication by Dr. Green exposing the author of a forged 
letter, said to have been written by Cotton Mather, in 
1682, to John Higginson. 

This volume also contains some hitherto unpublished 
documents relating to American history, communicated by 
Worthington C. Ford : — Letters of James Cheetham, 
an English radical, who escaped to this country in 1798 ; 
letters which passed between Edward Everett and John 
McLean, in 1828, relating to the use of patronage in 


elections, and to the distribution of public office ; also, 
by, Mr. Matthews, a Proposal for the Enlargement of 
University Learning in New England, 1658-1660. 
Various original papers relating to the execution of John 
Brown and to the War of Secession are also included. 

Beside the tributes paid to deceased members, five 
memoirs of Resident Members are printed : that of Daniel 
Henry Chamberlain, by Mr. Gilbert ; that of Peleg 
Whitman Chandler, by Mr. Stan wood ; that of Henry 
Gardner Denny, by Mr. Shaw ; that of Samuel Edward 
Herrick, by Dr. Gordon ; and that of Solomon Lincoln, 
by John D. Long. Four of these are accompanied by 
photogravure portraits. 

The consolidated index of the Second Series of the 
Proceedings is in press, and will probably be published 
before the next annual meeting. 

The By-Laws of the Society now in use, the result of 
a careful revision, are included in the proceedings of the 
April meeting, 1908. This revision, printed together with 
a new draft of the Short Account of the Society, by Mr. 
Smith, and a complete list of the officers and members of 
the Society from its beginning to the time of publication, 
has been distributed in book form. 

Charles Francts Adams, 
Edward Stanwood, 
James Ford Rhodes, 


Boston, October 22, 1908. 



Preface v 

List of Illustrations xvii 

Officers elected April 9, 1908 xix 

Resident Members xx 

Honorary and Corresponding Members . . xxii 

Members Deceased xxiv 


Corresponding Member elected, Wilberforce Eames ... 1 

Bequest of Stephen Salisbury received 1 

Report of the Council 2 

Report of the Treasurer 6 

Report of the Auditing Committee 26 

Report of the Librarian 26 

Report of the Cabinet-Keeper 28 

Report of the Committee on the Library and Cabinet ... 3,1 

Officers elected 32 

Action on the declination of Charles C. Smith to be re-elected 

Treasurer 33 

Paper by John D. Long on a Reference to W. H. Seward in 

Carl Schurz's Reminiscences 33 

Paper by Edward Stan wood on An Anticipation of the 

Monroe Doctrine 39 



Letters of James Cheetham, 1801-1807, taken from the 
Jefferson Papers in the Library of Congress, communicated 


Memoir of Samuel Edward Herrick by George A. Gordon . 65 


Corresponding Member elected, George Walter Prothero . . 71 
Report by the President of Amendments to the By-Laws . . 71 
Minute by the President in grateful recognition of the long 
and faithful services (1877-1907) of Charles C. Smith as 

Treasurer of the Society 73 

Votes to secure the portraits of Mr. Smith and of his prede- 
cessors, as Treasurers 77 

Tribute 03' the President to Daniel Henry Chamberlain . . 77 
Letter of Henry A. Wise, November 16, 1859, relative to the 
approaching execution of John Brown, communicated by 

Josiah P. Quincy 93 

Mention of extracts from a paper bj T F. B. Sanborn on 

Edward Gove . 94 


Resident Member elected, William Vail Kellen 95 

Corresponding Member elected, Jean Jules Jusserand ... 95 
Announcement of the resignation of Charles C. Smith as Editor 

of the Society's publications 95 

Report back from the Council of Amendments to the By-Laws, 
which were then adopted, to dispense with entrance fee 
and annual payment ; to furnish members regular publi- 
cations free of charge ; and to repay commutation fees 95 
Address by the President at the unveiling, in the Dowse 
Libraiy, of the bust of Robert C. Winthrop, President of 

the Society from 1855 to 1885 97 

Paper by Edwin D. Mead on John Cotton's Farewell Sermon 

to Winthrop' s Company at Southampton 101 



Memorandum by the President on W. H. Seward and Carl 
Schurz, suggested by John D. Long's paper at the April 
Meeting 115 

Letter of James Savage, Jr., May 28, 1862, relative to the part 
borne by the Second Regiment of Massachusetts Volunteer 
Infantry during the campaign in the Shenandoah Valley, 
communicated by the President 117 

Paper by Edward Stanwood on The Separation of Maine 

from Massachusetts 125 


Corresponding Member elected, James Kendall Hosmer . . 166 

Minute presented by William R. Thayer on the eightieth 

birthday of Pasquale Villari 166 

Remarks by Samuel A. Green on the gift by Mrs. Elizabeth 
Anna (Byles) Ellis of a chair which once belonged to 
Lieutenant-Governor William Tailer, to whom it was 
presented by Queen Anne 166 

Remarks by Samuel A. Green on the Petition of Christopher 
Talbot to Sir Edmund Andros for letters-patent to be 
granted for his engine 167 

Invitation by the First Church in Boston to the Societ}', to 
be present at the unveiling of the Memorial to John 
Cotton 169 

Memoir of Daniel Henry Chamberlain, by Edward H. Gilbert 170 


Appointment of the Committee to publish the Proceedings of 

the Society 180 

Recognition by the President of the services of Charles C. 
Smith as Editor of the Society from November, 1889 to 
October, 1907 . 180 

Announcement of the deaths of Resident Members, Henry G. 

Denny, John Elliot Sanford, and Solomon Lincoln . . 182 


Tributes by the President : page 

to Henry G. Denny 182 

to John E. Sanford 183 

to Solomon Lincoln 183 

to David Masson, an Honorary Member . . . - . . . 184 
Announcement of the deaths of Corresponding Members, John 

Marshall Brown, John A. Doyle, and Sir Spencer Walpole 185 
Tribute by the President to Sir Spencer Walpole .... 186 
Tribute to Heniy G. Denny, by Edward E. Hale .... 186 
Tribute to Solomon Lincoln, by John D, Long . . . . . 189 
Tribute to David Masson, by Barrett Wendell . . . . 193 
Tribute to John Andrew Doyle, by Edward Channing . . . 196 
Tribute to Sir Spencer Walpole, by James F. Rhodes . . . 198 
Paper by Albert Matthews on Documents in a File of the 

Boston News-Letter (1711-1715) in the Boston Athenaeum 204 
Paper by M. A. DeWolee Howe on More Letters of William 

Vassall, 1784, 1785 210 

Paper by F. B. Sanborn on The Early History of Kansas, 

1854-1861 219 

Remarks by Samuel A. Green on the gift by Joseph and 
Susanna Willard of a silhouette of Joseph Willard, Presi- 
dent of Harvard University, 1781-1804 229 

Remarks by Samuel A. Green on the gift b} T Mrs. J. A. Swan 
of two water-color views of Trinity Church, Summer Street, 

Boston 230 

Memorandum by Grenville H. Norcross on an extract from 
Haldimand's diary, 1786, relative to a strike among car- 
penters at New York in 1781 230 

House Committee appointed 231 


Remarks by Barrett Wendell in presenting from Mrs. C. V. 
Jamison some papers relating to a characteristic episode 
in the life of Longfellow 232 

Paper by M. A. DeWolee Howe on the bust of George 

Bancroft, and the curious history of its discovery . . . 234 



Paper by William B. Weeden on Early Oriental Commerce in 

Providence 236 

Memoir of Solomon Lincoln, by John D. Long 279 

Memoir of Peleg Whitman Chandler, by Edward Stanwood . 281 


Resident Member elected, Frederic Winthrop 291 

Corresponding Member elected, John Bagnell Bury . . . 291 

Honorary Member elected, Henry Adams 291 

New draft by Charles C. Smith of a Short Account of the 

Society .291 

Mention of a paper read by Roger B. Merriman on a neglected 
phase of Queen Elizabeth's treatment of her Catholic sub- 
jects in England 295 

Remarks by James F. Hunnewell in giving a large photo- 
graphic likeness of Richard Frothingham, Treasurer of 

the Society from 1847 to 1877 295 

Paper by James F. Hunnewell on Three Early Washington 

Monuments 296 

Paper by Albert Matthews on A Proposal for the Enlarge- 
ment of University Learning in New England, 1658-1660 301 
Memoir of Henry Gardner Denny, by Samuel S. Shaw . . 310 


Resident Member elected, Robert Samuel Rantoul . . . . 315 

Corresponding Member elected, Rafael Altamira y Crevea . 315 
Honorary Membership of the Society, and the election of Henry 

Adams, by the President ,...315 

Tribute by the President to Edward Henry Strobel . . . 318 

Tribute to Mr. Strobel by Archibald Cary Coolidge . . . 319 
Paper by President Adams on President Lincoln's Offer of a 

Military Command to Garibaldi in 1861 319 

Paper b}' Josiah P. Quincy in presenting papers relating to 

the execution of John Brown 326 



Second Paper, by F. B. Sanborn, on The Early History of 

Kansas, 1854-1861 331 

Letters between Edward Everett and John McLean, 1828, 
relating to the use of patronage in elections and the princi- 
ples which should control the distribution of public office, 
communicated by Worthington C. Ford 359 


Recent additions to the series of portraits of Treasurers of the 

Society reported by the Cabinet-Keeper . ... 394 

Resident Member elected, George Lyman Kittredge . . . 394 

Corresponding Member elected, James Wilberforce Longle} T . 394 
Committees appointed : to nominate officers ; to examine the 
Treasurer's accounts ; and to examine the Library and 

Cabinet 394 

Revision of the By-Laws reported 394 

Tribute by the President to Charles Henry Dalton .... 394 

Tribute to Edward Gaylord Bourne, by James Ford Rhodes 399 
Paper by Samuel A. Green on a forged letter said to have been 

written by Cotton Mather in 1682 to John Higginson . . 407 
Remarks by Albert Bushnell Hart on the southern question 

in the light of a recent visit to remote parts of the South 409 


Resident Member elected, Charles Pelham Greenough . . . 412 

Corresponding Member elected, Henry Morse Stephens . . 412 

Report of the Council 412 

Report of the Treasurer 417 

Report of the Auditing Committee 424 

Report of the Librarian 424 

Report of the Cabinet-Keeper 426 

Report of the Committee on the Library and Cabinet . . . 429 

Officers elected 430 

Paper by James DeNormandie on Modernism 430 



Letters of Harrison Gra} r to Harrison Gray Otis, 1787, relative 
, to regaining his confiscated estate, communicated by 

Grenville H. Norcross 435 

By-Laws revised and adopted, new code 439 


House Committee appointed 450 

Announcement of the publication of the late Judge Mellen 
Chamberlain's History of Chelsea ; and of a new edition 
of the Short Account of the Society, with the revised By- 
Laws and a complete list of officers and members . . . 450 

Invitation from the Society Historique Franco- Americaine to 
attend a meeting in connection with the Quebec tercenten- 
ary, and the appointment of Barrett Wendell to represent 
the Society 450 

Remarks by William R. Thayer on The Centenary of Lincoln 

and Darwin 451 

Third and concluding Paper by F. B. Sanborn on The Early 

History of Kansas, 1854-1861 452 

Second Paper by James DeNormandie on Modernism . . . 499 


Memorandum by the Treasurer relative to the bequest of 
Mellen Chamberlain, and the publication of his History of 
Chelsea, submitted by the President for the Council . . 508 

Papers, 1859, 1860, given by Mrs. William B. Rogers relative 
to the Harper's Ferry affair of October, 1859, and the 
execution of John Brown . 509 

Account by Barrett Wendell of his presence as delegate of 
the Historical Society at the dinner of the Societe His- 
torique Franco- Americaine on May 30 518 

Third and concluding Paper by James DeNormandie on 

Modernism . . , 519 



Remarks by Edwin D. Mead in protest against the proposed 

change of the name of Maverick Square, East Boston 527 

Remarks b}' President Adams on the disregard of historical 
association in the changes of names of streets and squares 
in Boston, and the desirability of a radical measure of reform 529 

Paper by President Adams on the visits of Miles Standish, in 
1621 and 1623, to Boston Harbor, and the reprint of a 
paper on Thompson's Island and Squantum by Elizabeth 
Taylor Horton 532 

List of Donors to the Library 541 

Index 545 



Bust of Robert Charles Winthrop Frontispiece 

Portrait op Samuel Edward Herrick 65 

Portrait of Daniel Henry Chamberlain . . . . . . 170 

Portrait of Solomon Lincoln 279 

Portrait of Peleg Whitman Chandler 281 





Elected April 9, 1908. 








Cabinet -JUeper. 

pembers at JTarge of t\t Comttil. 

NATHANIEL PAINE ............ Worcester. 





Additional Member of the Council. 
BLISS PERRY Cambridge. 




Hon. Samuel Abbott Green, LL.D. 

Rev. Edward Everett Hale, D.D. 

Josiah Phillips Quincy, A.M. 

Charles Card Smith, A.M. 

Abner Cheney Goodell, A.M. 
Edward Doubleday Harris, Esq. 

Hon. Winslow Warren, LL.B. 
Charles William Eliot, LL.D. 

Charles Francis Adams, LL.D. 

Hon. William Everett, LL.D. 
Hon. Henry Cabot Lodge, LL.D. 

John Torrey Morse, Jr., A.B. 

Gamaliel Bradford, A.B. 

Henry Williamson Haynes, A.M. 


Thomas Wentworth Higginson, 

Rev. Henry Fitch Jenks, A.M. 
Rev. Alexander McKenzie, D.D. 

Arthur Lord, A.B. 
Frederic Ward Putnam, S.D. 
James McKellar Bugbee, Esq. 

Edward Channing, Ph.D. 

William Watson Goodwin, D.C.L. 

Edwin Pliny Seaver, A.M. 

Albert Bushnell Hart, LL.D. 
Thornton Kirkland Lothrop, LL.B. 

Henry Fitz- Gilbert Waters, A.M. 
Abbott Lawrence Lowell, LL.D. 

Hon. Oliver Wendell Holmes, LL.D. 
Henry Pickering Walcott, LL.D. 

Hon. Charles Russell Codman, LL.B. 
Barrett Wendell, A.B. 
James Ford Rhodes, LL.D. 

Hon. Edward Francis Johnson, LL.B. 
Rt. Rev. William Lawrence, D.D. 
William Roscoe Thayer, A.M. 



Rev. Morton Dexter, A.M. 
Hon. Thomas Jefferson Coolidge, 

Hon. William Wallace Crapo, LL.D. 

Hon. Francis Cabot Lowell, A.B. 
Granville Stanley Hall, LL.D. 
Alexander Agassiz, LL.D. 
Col. Theodore Ayrault Dodge. 

Rev. Leverett Wilson Spring, D.D. 
Col. AVilliam Roscoe Livermore. 
Hon. Richard Olney, LL.D. 
Lucien Carr, A.M. 

Rev. George Angier Gordon, D.D. 
John Chipman Gray, LL.D. 
Rev. James DeNormandie, D.D. 
Andrew McFarland Davis, A.M. 


Archibald Cary Coolidge, Ph.D. 
John Noble, LL.D. 
Charles Pickering Bowditch, A.M. 
Rev. Edward Henry Hall, D.D. 

James Frothingham Hunnewell, 

Melville Madison Bigelow, LL.D. 

Thomas Leonard Livermore, A.M. 
Nathaniel Paine, A.M. 
Charles Gross, LL.D. 
John Osborne Sumner, A.B. 
Arthur Theodore Lyman, A.M. 
Samuel Lothrop Thorndike, A.M. 

Henry Lee Higginson, LL.D. 
Brooks Adams, A.B. 
Grenville Howland Norcross, LL.B. 
Edward Hooker Gilbert, A.B. 


Franklin Benjamin Sanborn, A.B. 
Charles Knowles Bolton, A.B. 
Samuel Savage Shaw, LL.B. 
Ephraim Emerton, Ph.D. 
Waldo Lincoln, A.B. 
Frederic Jesup Stimson, LL.B. 
Edward Stanwood, Litt.D. 
Moor field Storey, A.M. 


Thomas Minns, Esq. 

Roger Bigelow Merriman, Ph.D. 

Charles Homer Haskins, Ph.D. 


Hon. John Davis Long, LL.D. 
Don Gleason Hill, A.M. 
Theodore Clarke Smith, Ph.D. 
Henry Greenleaf Pearson, A.B. 
Bliss Perry, LL.D. 
Hon. John Lathrop, LL.D. 


Edwin Doak Mead, Esq. 

Edward Henry Clement, Litt.D. 

William Endicott, A.M. 

Lindsay Swift, A.B. 

Hon. George Sheldon. 

Mark Antony DeWolfe Howe, 

Arnold Augustus Rand, Esq. 


Jonathan Smith, A.B. 
Albert Matthews, A.B. 
William Vail Kellen, LL.D. 


Frederic Winthrop, A.B. 
Hon, Robert Samuel Rantoul, LL.B. 
George Lyman Kittredge, LL.D. 
Charles Pelham Greenough, LL.B. 
Henry Ernest Woods, A.M. 


Rt. Hon. James Bryce, D.C.L. 


Rt. Hon. Sir George Otto Trevelyan, 
Bart., D.C.L. 


Pasquale Villari, D.C.L. 

Henry Charles Lea, LL.D. 

Adolf Harnaek, D.D. 
Rt. Hon. Viscount Morley, D.C.L. 
Goldwin Smith, D.C.L. 

Ernest Lavisse. 

Rear-Admiral Alfred Thayer 
Mahan, D.C.L. 

Henry Adams, LL.D. 


Hon. John Bigelow, LL.D. 
Hubert Howe Bancroft, A.M. 

John Austin Stevens, A.B. 
Joseph Florimond Loubat, LL.D. 
Charles Henry Hart, LL.B. 

Franklin Bowditch Dexter, Litt.D. 
Hon. Andrew Dickson White, LL.D. 

Sir James MacPherson LeMoine, 


Rev. Charles Richmond Weld, LL.D. 


Hon. James Burrill Angell, LL.D. 
William Babcock Weeden, A.M. 


Rev. George Park Fisher, LL.D. 

Woodrow Wilson, LL.D. 

Hon. Joseph Hodges Choate, D.CL. 

John Franklin Jameson, LL.D. 



Rev. William Cunningham, LL.D. 


Hon. Simeon Eben Baldwin, LL.D. 
John Bassett Moore, LL.D. 


Frederic Harrison, Litt.D. 
Frederic Bancroft, LL.D. 
Charles Harding Firth, LL.D. 
William James Ashley, M.A. 


John Bach McMaster, LL.D. 
Albert Venn Dicey, LL.D. 
Reuben Gold Thwaites, LL.D. 
John Christopher Schwab, Ph.D. 
Worthington Chauncey Ford, A.M. 


Rev. Arthur Blake Ellis, LL.B. 

Auguste Moireau. 

Hon. Horace Davis, LL.D. 


Sidney Lee, LL.D. 

Frederick Jackson Turner, Ph.D. 

William Archibald Dunning, LL.D. 
James Schouler, LL.D. 
George Parker Winship, A.M. 
Gabriel Hanotaux. 

Hubert Hall. 


Andrew Cunningham McLaugh- 
lin, LL.B. 
Hon. Beekman Winthrop, LL.B. 

Hon. James Phinney Baxter, Litt.D. 
Wilberforce Eames, A.M. 
George Walter Prothero, LL.D. 
Hon. Jean Jules Jusserand, LL.D. 
James Kendall Hosmer, LL.D. - 

John Bagnell Bury, LL.D. 
Rafael Altamira y Crevea. 
Hon. James Wilberforce Longley, 

Henry Morse Stephens, A.M. 
Charles Borgeaud, LL.D. 

[Henry Adams, LL.D. 
membership on January £ 

-was transferred from the Corresponding to the Honorary 


Members who have died, or of ivhose death information has been received, since the . 

last volume of Proceedings was issued, June 27, 1907 , arranged in 

the order of their election, and with date of death. 


Charles Eliot Norton, D.C.L Oct. 21, 1908. 

Henry Gardner Denny, A.M . Sept. 19, 1907. 

Hon. John Elliot Sanford, LL.D Oct. 11, 1907. 

Rev. Alexander Viets Griswold Allen, D.D July 1, 1908. 

Solomon Lincoln, A.M. Oct. 15, 1907. 

Hon. Edward Henry Strobel, LL.D Jan. 15, 1908. 

Charles Henry Dalton, Esq Feb. 23, 1908. 

David Masson, LL D , . Oct. 6, 1907. 


John Marshall Brown, A.M. July 20,1907. 

John Andrew Doyle, M.A Aug. 4, 1907. 

Daniel Coit Oilman, LL.D Oct. 13, 1908. 

Edward Gay lord Bourne, Ph.D Feb. 24, 1908. 

Sir Spencer Walpole, K.C.B July 8, 1907. 





THE Annual Meeting was held on Thursday, the 11th 
instant, at three o'clock, p. m. ; the President, Charles 
Francis Adams, LL.D., in the chair. 

The record of the March meeting was read and approved ; 
and the Librarian and Cabinet-Keeper submitted their monthly 

Mr. Wilberforce Eames, of New York, Librarian of the 
Lenox Branch of the New York Public Library, was elected a 
Corresponding Member. 

Hon. Samuel A. Green communicated, in behalf of Rev. Dr. 
George A. Gordon, the memoir of the late Rev. Dr. Samuel 
E. Herrick which Dr. Gordon had been appointed to prepare 
for publication in the Proceedings. 

The Treasurer said that since he had come into the room 
he had received from the Executors of the Will of the late 
Hon. Stephen Salisbury, of Worcester QI. U. 1856), a check 
for the amount of the bequest of Mr. Salisbury of $5,000, 
together with the accrued interest up to the present time. 
There is no restriction on the use of this bequest, or of the 
income arising therefrom ; but in the opinion of the Treasurer 
it should be treated as a permanent unrestricted fund. 

In the absence of T. W. Higginson, LL.D., in consequence 
of a death in his family, the Report drawn up by him as Senior 
Member at Large of the Council was read by Mr. Albert B. 
Hart, as follows : 



Report of the Council. 

It is curious to compare the reports of the Council at the 
present day with the reports of fifty years ago, when the pres- 
ent building of this Society was non-existent and the crowded 
upper rooms upon Tremont Street afforded the only head- 
quarters. In the report for 1867, for instance, it was stated 
by Mr. Saltonstall, the chairman of the retiring committee, 
that the prospects of the Society at the beginning of that year 
had been "somewhat gloomy," and that "the enhanced cost 
of paper and printing had apparently rendered it imperative 
to cease all effort at publishing the Collections or the Pro- 
ceedings " (p. 5). It was certainly a great step from this to 
the first sentence of a report presented by Mr. A. McF. Davis 
in behalf of the Council in 1904, as he began his report by 
saying cheerfully, " From year to year it has been the pleas- 
ant duty of the Council to congratulate the Society upon 
the satisfactory condition of our finances." 1 This was sim- 
ply the result of added bequests and of good investments 
which followed. It becomes easier and easier, therefore, to 
look with hopeful eyes on the future of the Society, and it is 
well to inquire if any change is 3 r et to be made which would 
advance our arrangements still further. 

The prosperity of the Society in regard to the fulness of 
attendance at meetings is quite remarkable, and it has in this 
respect greatly the superiority over various similar societies 
in this city. This is due, perhaps, to the fact that our 
members are brought together by unity of interest in a general 
theme ; whereas the meetings of the others may be made up 
from a great variety of professions, and the proceedings are 
not always interesting or even intelligible to the less learned 
members. On the other hand, the locality of this building is 
still a little less accessible than was the previous dwelling- 
place of our Society, although the rapidity of the city's growth 
in this direction is quickly diminishing this obstacle, and a 
similar position is not regarded as a serious obstacle to the use 
made of the Medical Library just around the corner. But 
there are other reasons which make the Public Library at 
present more convenient for study than our own building, and 
it may be well to consider whether our unique manuscript col- 
lection in particular may not be made more accessible to 

1 2 Proceedings, vol. xviii. p. 265. 


readers by a wider array of small tables and seats, so that our 
increasing facilities may end in affording easier access to our 
important collections now placed in the outer hall. 

It is quite worth considering, moreover, whether an addi- 
tional assistant would not be a valuable addition for this pur- 
pose, when one considers the much larger attendance supplied 
in this respect at the Boston Public Library. The actual force 
now employed may be enough to supply the comparatively 
small number of students who now visit the rooms; and the 
arrangement of all papers in the drawers is very satisfactory ; 
but the provision of one more attendant would seem essential 
to the larger service implied by such great additional supplies 
of unique treasures as the Winthrop and Parkman papers. 
The arrangements, still incomplete for miscellaneous collec- 
tions, in the upper hall may also create additional need of 
enlarged service. 

Of the two Resident Members who have died during the last 
year, Messrs. Young and Siafter, both have distinguished 
themselves for faithful service ; and the whole nation is still 
mourning for the loss of our Honorary Member, Carl Schurz, 
whose autobiography is still passing through the magazines. 
Of the five Corresponding Members, the one whose name will 
be dearest to all students who have visited the British Museum 
is Richard Garnett ; while Gustave Vapereau, Alexander Brown, 
Henry Martyn Baird, and Frederic William Maitland have all 
left honored memories behind. The loss of George Spring 
Merriam and of Thomas Corwin Mendenhall by resignation is 
also regretted, while the names of six new Resident Members 
are very welcome, these being Messrs. Lindsa} r Swift, George 
Sheldon, M. A. DeW. Howe, Arnold A. Rand, Jonathan 
Smith, and Albert Matthews. Messrs. Beekman Winthrop 
and James Phinney Baxter have been elected Corresponding- 
Members, and there are still vacancies of four in that depart- 
ment. Captain Mahan has been transferred from the Corre- 
sponding membership to the Honorary position. 

The following changes took place, during the year, in the 
membership of the Society : 

Deaths : 

Resident Members. 

Edward James Young June 23, 1906. 

Edmund Farwell Siafter Sept. 22, 1906. 


Honorary Member. 
Carl Schurz May 14, 1906. 

Corresponding Members. 

Richard Garnett April 13, 1906. 

Gustave Vapereau April 18, 1906. 

Alexander Brown . . . Aug. 29, 1906. 

Henry Martvn Baird Nov. 11, 1906. 

Frederic William Maitland Dec. 19, 1906. 

Resignations : 

Resident Members. 

George Spring Merriam Nov. 8, 1906. 

Thomas Corwin Mendenhall Nov. 8, 1906. 

Transfer : 

Corresponding Membership to the Honorary. 
Alfred Thayer Mahan Jan. 10, 1907. 

Elections : 

Resident Members. 

Lindsay Swift April 12,1906. 

George Sheldon June 14, 1906. 

Mark Antony De Wolfe Howe ...... Nov. 8, 1906. 

Arnold Augustus Rand Dec. 13, 1906. 

Jonathan Smith Jan. 10, 1907. 

Albert Matthews Feb. 14, 1907. 

Corresponding Members. 

Beekman Winthrop June 14, 1906. 

James Phinney Baxter . Jan. 10, 1907. 

The following publications have been issued by the Society 
during the year: 

Serial numbers of Proceedings, Vol. XX., March to December, 1906. 
Collections, seventh series, Vol. VI. (Part II. of the Bowdoin and 
Temple Papers). 

The following is a list of such publications by members of the 
Society, during the year, as have come to the knowledge of 
the Council : 

Lee's Centennial. An Address by Charles Francis Adams at Lex- 
ington, Virginia, Saturday, January 19, 1907, on the invitation of the 
President and Faculty of Washington and Lee University. 


Centralization and the Law ; Scientific and Legal Education [lectures 
delivered by Melville Madison Bigelow, Brooks Adams, and others, 
before the Boston University Law School]. With an introduction by 
Mr. Bigelow. 

Mayan Nomenclature. Privately printed. By Charles P. Bowditch. 

The Temples of the Cross, of the Foliated Cross, and of the Sun at 
Palenque. Privately printed. By Charles P. Bowditch. 

Four American Leaders [Franklin, Washington, Channing, and 
Emerson]. By Charles W. Eliot. „ : 

Great Riches. By Charles W. Eliot. 

Through Man to God. By George A. Gordon. 

The Jeffersonian System, 1801-1811. By Edward Channing. 
With maps. [Vol. XII. of "The American Nation," edited by Albert 
Bushnell Hart.] 

Confiscation Laws of Massachusetts. By Andrew McFarland Davis. 

The Investments of Harvard College, 1776-1790: an Episode in the 
Finances of the Revolution. By Andrew McFarland Davis. Reprinted 
from the Quarterly Journal of Economics, May, 1906. 

A Search for the Beginnings of Stock Speculation. By Andrew 
McFarland Davis. 

The American Nation : a History from Original Sources by Associ- 
ated Scholars. Edited by Albert Bushnell Hart, advised by Historical 
Societies. Vols. VI.-XIX., of which three are by Corresponding Mem- 
bers and three by Resident Members ; Vol. VII., " France in America, 
1497-1763," by Reuben Gold Thwaites ; Vol. X., "The Confed- 
eration and the Constitution, 1783-1789," by Andrew Cunningham 
McLaughlin; Vol. XIV., " Rise of the New West, 1819-1829," by 
Frederick Jackson Turner; Vols. XII., XVI., and XVIII., by Pro- 
fessor Channing, Professor Hart, and Theodore Clarke Smith, which 
appear in other parts of this list. 

Peabody Education Fund. Proceedings of the Trustees at their 
Forty-eighth Meeting, New York, 3 October, 1906. By Hon. Samuel 
A. Green, General Agent and Secretary. 

Peabody Education Fund. Proceedings of the Trustees at their 
Forty-ninth Meeting, New York, 20 February, 1907. By Hon. 
Samuel A. Green, Secretary. 

Slavery and Abolition, 1831-1841. By Albert Bushnell Hart. 
With maps. [Vol. XVI. of " The American Nation," edited by Pro- 
fessor Hart.] 

The Descendants of Adam Mott of Hempstead, Long Island, N. Y. 
A Genealogical Study, revised edition. By Edward Doubleday Harris. 

Diocese of Massachusetts. Thirteenth Annual Address of the 
Rt. Rev. William Lawrence, D.D., to the Convention of the Diocese, 
May 2, 1906. 


A Frontier Town and other Essays. By Henry Cabot Lodge. 

Reminiscences of Old Cambridge (reprinted from the Proceedings of 
the Cambridge Historical Society), being in part the report of an in- 
formal address to the Cambridge Historical Society on the evening of 
October 30, 1905. By Charles Eliot Norton. 

Early American Engravings and the Cambridge Press Imprints, 
1640-1692, in the Library of the American Antiquarian Society. By 
Nathaniel Paine. Reprinted from the Proceedings of the American An- 
tiquarian Society [with two Supplements, Addenda and Corrections]. 

Walt Whitman : His Life and Works. By Bliss Perry. 

Evidence of the Work of Man on Objects from Quaternary Caves 
in California. By F. W. Putnam. 

History of the United States from the Compromise of 1850 to the 
Final Restoration of Home Rule at the South in 1877. Vols. VI. , 
VII., 1866-1877. By James Ford Rhodes. 

Successors in Success. A Memorial Address in Honor of Michael 
Anagnos, given at the Tremont Temple, in Boston, Wednesday, 
October 24, 1906. By F. B. Sanborn. 

Parties and Slavery, 1850-1859, By Theodore Clarke Smith. 
With maps. [Vol. XVIII. of " The American Nation," edited by 
Albert Bushnell Hart.] 

Memoir of Sigourney Butler. By Lindsay Swift. 

Cavour e Bismarck. Un parallel© storico di William Roscoe Thayer. 

Poem at the Celebration of the Two Hundred and Seventy-fifth 
Anniversary of the Founding of Cambridge, Sanders Theatre, December 
21,1905. By William Roscoe Thayer. [Reprinted from the Proceed- 
ings of the Cambridge Historical Society.] 

Edward Atkinson. By Thomas Wentworth Higginson. [Reprinted 
from the Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.] 
There has also been printed in pamphlet form by the Cambridge Pub- 
lic Library in 1896 a chronological list of all the publications of 
T. W. Higginson. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Thomas Wentworth Higginson, 

Chairman of Committee. 

The Report of the Treasurer and the Report of the Auditing 
Committee were presented in print, as has been customary for 
many years : 

Report of the Treasurer. 

In compliance with the requirements of the By-Laws, 
Chapter VII., Article 1, the Treasurer respectfully submits 
his Annual Report, made up to March 30, 1907. 


The special funds held by him are twenty-two in number, 
and are as follows : — 

I. The Appleton Fund, which was created Nov. 18, 1854, 
by a gift to the Society, from Nathan Appleton, William Ap- 
pleton, and Nathaniel I. Bowditch, trustees under the will of 
Samuel Appleton, of stocks of the appraised value of ten thou- 
sand dollars. These stocks were subsequently sold for $ 12,203, 
at which sum the fund now stands. The income is applicable 
to " the procuring, preserving, preparation, and publication of 
historical papers." The cost of publishing nineteen volumes 
of the Collections has been charged to the income of this 

II. The Massachusetts Historical Trust-Fund, which 
now stands, with the accumulated income, at $ 10,000. This 
fund originated in a gift of two thousand dollars from the 
Hon. David Sears, presented Oct. 15, 1855, and accepted by 
the Society Nov. 8, 1855. On Dec. 26, 1866, it was increased 
by a gift of five hundred dollars from Mr. Sears, and another 
of the same amount from another associate, Nathaniel Thayer. 
The annual income must be added to the principal between 
July and January, or by " a recorded vote " of " the Society " 
it may " be expended in such objects as to them may be desir- 
able." The directions in Mr. Sears's declaration of trust may 
be found in the printed Proceedings for November, 1855. The 
cost of publishing five volumes of the Collections has been 
charged to the income of this fund. 

III. The Dowse Fund, given to the Society by George 
Livermore and Eben. Dale, executors of the w r ill of Thomas 
Dowse, April 9, 1857, for the "safe keeping" of the Dowse 
Library, which was formally given by Mr. Dowse to the So- 
ciety in July, 1856. It amounts to $10,000. The income for 
the year has been placed to the credit of the General Account, 
in accordance with what was understood to be the wish of 
the executors. 

IV. The Peabody Fund, which was presented by the 
eminent banker and philanthropist George Peabody, in a letter 
dated Jan. 1, 1867, and now stands at 122,123. The income 
is available only for the publication and illustration of the 
Society's Proceedings and Memoirs, and for the preservation 
of the Society's Historical Portraits. The cost of publishing 
twenty-five volumes of the Proceedings and the Consolidated 


Index to the First Series lias been charged to the income of 
this fund ; and a sufficient sum has been reserved in the treas- 
ury to defray the cost of publishing a Consolidated Index to 
the Second Series, now in preparation. 1 

V. The Savage Fund, which was a bequest of $5,000 
from the Hon. James Savage, President from 1841 to 1855, 
received in June, 1873. By a change of the original invest- 
ments the principal was increased $1,000, and the fund now 
stands on the books at the sum of $6,000. The income is to 
be used for the increase of the Society's Library. 

VI. The Erastus B. Bigelow Fund, which was given in 
February, 1881, by Mrs. Helen Bigelow Merriman, in recogni- 
tion of her father's interest in the work of the Society. The 
original sum was one thousand dollars ; but the interest was 
added to the principal to bring the amount up to $2,000, at 
which it now stands. There is no restriction as to the use 
to be made of this fund ; but up to the present time the 
income has been used only for the purchase of books for the 

VII. The William Winthrop Fund, which for many 
years stood at the sum of $3,000, was received Oct. 13, 1882, 
under the will of William Winthrop, a Corresponding Member 
of the Societ} 7 from 1861 to 1869. By the will of our associate 
the younger Robert C. Winthrop the sum of $2,000 was given 
to the Society to be added to and form part of the fund be- 
queathed by his kinsman. This sum was received by the 
Treasurer, Oct. 13, 1905, exactly twenty-three years after the 
receipt of the original bequest ; and the fund now stands at 
$5,000. The income is to be applied fci to the binding for better 
preservation of the valuable manuscripts and books apper- 
taining to the Society." 

VIII. The Richard Frothingham Fund, which repre- 
sents a gift to the Society, on the 23d of March, 1883, from 
the widow of Richard Frothingham, Treasurer from 1847 to 
1877, of a certificate of twenty shares in the Union Stock Yard 
and Transit Co., of Chicago, of the par value of $100 each, 
and of the stereotype plates of Mr. Frothingham's " Siege of 
Boston," " Life of Joseph Warren," and " Rise of the Repub- 

1 By an accidental oversight the words " Printed at the Charge of the Pea- 
body Fund " were omitted from the title-page of Volume XI. of the Second Series 
of the Proceedings. 


lie." The fund stands on the Treasurer's books at $3,000, 
exclusive of the copyright. There are no restrictions on the 
uses' to which the income may be applied. The cost of pub- 
lishing two volumes of Collections and the Catalogue of the 
Cabinet was charged to the income of this fund. 

IX. The General Fund, which represents the following 
items : — 

1. A gift of two thousand dollars from the residua^ estate 
of Mary Prince Townsend, by the executors of her will, 
William Minot and William Minot, Jr., in recognition of 
which, by a vote of the Society, passed June 13, 1861, the 
Treasurer was " directed to make and keep a special entry in 
his account books of this contribution as the donation of Miss 
Mary P. Townsend." 

2. A legacy of two thousand dollars from Henry Harris, 
received in July, 1867. 

3. A legacy of one thousand dollars from our associate 
George Bemis, received in March, 1879. 

4. A gift of one hundred dollars from our associate Ralph 
Waldo Emerson, received in April, 1881. 

5. A legacy of one thousand dollars from our associate 
Williams Latham, received in May, 1884. 

6. A bequest of five shares in the Cincinnati Gas-Light 
and Coke Co. from George Dexter, Recording Secretary 
from 1878 to 1883, received in June, 1884. This bequest for 
several years stood on the Treasurer's books at $900, at which 
sum the shares were valued when the incomes arising from 
separate investments were all merged in one consolidated 
account. Besides the regular quarterly dividends there has 
been received up to the present time from the sale of sub- 
scription rights, etc., the sum of $337.56, which has been 
added to the nominal amount of Mr. Dexter's bequest. 

7. A legacy of one thousand dollars from our associate 
Ebenezer Rockwood Hoar, received in February, 1895. 

8. A gift of one hundred dollars from Horace Davis, a 
Corresponding Member, received in April, 1904. 

9. A gift of one hundred dollars from our associate Edward 
D. Harris, received in March, 1905. 

10. Thirty commutation fees of one hundred and fifty 
dollars each. 

11. The sum of 129,955.17 was withdrawn from the proceeds 


of the sale of the Tremont Street estate, and added to this 
fund ; the sum of $731.70 received from the Medical Library 
for cost of party-wall was also deducted from the cost of the 
real estate, and added to this fund ; and a subsequent payment 
of 1397 for permanent improvements was charged to this fund 
•and credited to Building Account. The net sum which has 
been credited to the fund from this source is $30,289.87. 

12. In March, 1888, when all the securities belonging to the 
Society were transferred to the consolidated investments, the 
sum of $100 was added to this fund to represent the increased 
market value at that time of an eight per cent bond of the 
Quincy and Palmyra Railroad Co. for $1,000, bought at par 
many years before, and specially held for this account. 

The amount of the fund at the present time is $43,427.43. 
The cost of publishing Volume VII. of the Second Series of the 
Proceedings was charged against the income of this fund. 

X. The Anonymous Fund, which originated in a gift 
of $1,000 to the Society in April, 1887, communicated in a 
letter to the Treasurer, from a valued associate, printed in the 
Proceedings (2d series, vol. iii. pp. 277, 278). A further gift 
of $250 was received from the same generous friend in April, 

1888. The income has been added to the principal; and in 
accordance with the instructions of the giver this policy is to 
be continued (see Proceedings, 2d series, vol. xiii. pp. 6Q, 67). 
The fund now stands at $3,461.89. 

XI. The William Amory Fund, which was a bequest of 
$3,000, from our associate William Amory, received Jan. 7, 

1889. There are no restrictions on the uses to which the 
income may be applied. The cost of publishing Volume X. of 
the Sixth Series of the Collections was charged to the income 
of this fund. 

XII. The Lawrence Fund, which was a bequest of 
$3,000, from our associate the younger Abbott Lawrence 
(H. U., Class of 1849), received in June, 1894. The income 
is " to be expended in publishing the Collections and Pro- 
ceedings " of the Society. The cost of publishing Volume 
XVII. of the Second Series of the Proceedings was charged 
against the income of this fund. 

XIII. The Robert C. Winthrop Fund, which originated 
in a bequest of $5,000, from the Hon. Robert C. Winthrop, 
President from 1855 to 1885, received in December, 1894. 


No restrictions were attached to this bequest ; but by a vote 
of the Society passed Dec. 13, 1891, it was directed that the 
income " shall be expended for such purposes as the Council 
may from time to time direct." By the will of our late asso- 
ciate Robert C. Winthrop, Jr., the sum of $5,000 was given to 
the Society to be added to and form part of the fund be- 
queathed by his father. This sum was received Oct. 13, 1905 ; 
and the fund now stands at $10,000. 

XIV. The Waterston Publishing Fund, which was a 
bequest of $10,000, from our associate the Rev. Robert C. 
Waterston, received in December, 1894. The income is to be 
used as a publishing fund, in accordance with the provisions 
of Mr. Waterston's will printed in the Proceedings (2d series, 
vol. viii. pp. 172, 173). The cost of publishing Volume 
XVIII. of the Second Series of the Proceedings was charged 
against the income of this fund. 

XV. The Ellis Fund, which originated in a bequest to 
the Society of $30,000, by Dr. George E. Ellis, President from 
1885 to 1894. This sum was paid into the Treasury Dec. 20, 
1895 ; and to it has been added the sum of $1,663.66 received 
from the sale of various articles of personal property, also given 
to the Society by Dr. Ellis, which it was not thought desirable 
to keep, making the whole amount of the fund $31,663.66. No 
part of the original sum can be used for the purchase of other 
real estate in exchange for the real estate specifically devised 
by Dr. Ellis's will. 

Besides the bequest in money, Dr. Ellis by his will gave to 
the Society his dwelling-house No. 110 Marlborough Street, 
with substantially all its contents. In the exercise of the dis- 
cretion which the Society was authorized to use, this house 
was sold for the sum of $25,000, and the proceeds invested in 
the more eligible estate on the corner of the Fenway and 
Boylston Street. The full sum received from the sale was 
entered on the Treasurer's books, to the credit of Ellis 
House, in perpetual memory of Dr. Ellis's gift. 

XVI. The Lowell Fund, which was a bequest of the 
Hon. John Lowell (H. U., Class of 1843), amounting to $3,000, 
received Sept. 13, 1897. There are no restrictions on the uses 
to which the income may be applied. The cost of publishing 
Volume XX. of the Second Series of the Proceedings will 
be charged against the income of this fund. 


XVII. The Waterston Fund, which was received April 
21, 1900, in full satisfaction of a bequest from our associate 
the Rev. Robert C. Waterston. Some legal questions hav- 
ing arisen in connection with this bequest, the matter was 
compromised, and the sum of $5,000 was received, as stated 
in the Proceedings (2d series, vol. xiv. pp. 163, 164). The 
income is to be used for printing a catalogue of the Waterston 
Library, for printing documents from it, and for making addi- 
tions to the Library from time to time. The catalogue of the 
Library was completed and issued in February, 1906. 

XVIII. The Waterston Fund No. 2, which was a fur- 
ther bequest of $10,000 from Mr. Waterston, in regard to 
which there were no legal questions, and which was also re- 
ceived April 21, 1900. The income is to be used for " print- 
ing and publishing any important or interesting autograph, 
original manuscripts, letters or documents which may be in 
possession of" the Society. 

Besides the three funds, for the creation of which provision 
was made by Mr. Waterston's will, the Treasurer received, 
under the will, the sum of $10,000, to be applied to the fitting 
up of a room or portion of a fire-proof building for the com- 
modious and safe keeping of the Waterston Collection. A 
room was accordingly set apart for that purpose, and the 
larger part of this sum was expended in making it con- 
venient and attractive. Some further expenditures must be 
made on this account, and any balance of cash remaining 
in the hands of the Treasurer will be used, in accordance with 
the terms of the will, in adding books to the collection, under 
the direction of the Council. 

XIX. The Robert Charles Billings Fund. This was 
a gift of $10,000, received April 16, 1903, from the surviving 
executors of the will of the late Robert Charles Billings. The 
income is to be used only for publications. The cost of pub- 
lishing Volume XIX. of the Second Series of the Proceedings 
was charged against the income of this fund. 

XX. The John Langdon Sibley Fund, which was cre- 
ated under the will of our associate, printed in the Proceedings 
(2d series, vol. ii. pp. 168-170), was received in two instal- 
ments, Aug. 5, 1903, and April 18, 1904. The income must 
be applied in the manner set forth in Mr. Sibley's will. The 
fund now stands on the books at $161,169.33. 


XXI. The Charlotte A. L. Sibley Fund, which was 
created under her will, printed in the Proceedings (2d series, 
vol. xvi. pp. 21-23), was also received in two instalments, 
Aug. 5, 1903, and April 18, 1904. There are no restrictions 
on the uses to which the income may be applied, and it has 
been carried to the credit of the General Account. The fund 
stands at $22,509.48. 

XXII. The Thomas L. Winthrop Fund, which is de- 
signed to perpetuate the memory of the fourth President of 
the Society. In the early part of 1837 he gave to the Society 
a beautiful copy of Audubon's " Birds of America." Since that 
time other organizations have come into existence which are 
directly interested in the study of natural history, and as the 
volumes were little used in this Library, it was thought best, 
after consultation with the descendants of the donor, to sell 
the volumes and add the proceeds to our permanent funds. 
This was done by the Librarian under the direction of the 
Council, and the sum of $2,000 was received by the Treasurer 
April 9, 1905. For the present the annual income will be 
added to the principal. 

On Dec. 16, 1903, the Treasurer received from the ex- 
ecutors under the will of our associate the late Hon. Mellen 
Chamberlain the sum of $5,520, on account of Judge Cham- 
berlain's bequest to the Society to defray the cost of publishing 
his " History of Chelsea." In May, 1906, the Treasurer re- 
ceived a further sum of $4,442.53, and in June the sum of 
$99.48 in final settlement of the estate, making the whole 
amount received from the executors of Judge Chamberlain's 
will $10,062.01. This bequest has been treated as an open 
account, — all payments for the History having been charged 
to it, and interest credited on unexpended balances available 
for the purpose. The interest so added amounts to $673.63 ; 
and the payments to the present time amount to $5,350.50. It 
is expected that the History will be published in the course of 
the next financial year. In the opinion of the Treasurer any 
unexpended balance remaining after all bills have been paid 
and any sums received for copies of the History sold should 
be separately funded as a perpetual memorial of the interest 
which our honored associate took in the work of the Society. 

The Treasurer also holds a deposit book in the Five Cent 
Savings Bank for $100 and interest, which is applicable to the 


care and preservation of the beautiful model of the Brattle 
Street Church, deposited with us in April, 1877. 

In January, 1905, the Treasurer received from our associate 
Thomas Minns the gift of one of the earliest deposit books 
issued by the " Provident Institution for Savings in the Town 
of Boston/' to Miss Maria Antoinette Parker, February 21, 
1821, with a transfer of the balance of principal and interest 
now or hereafter to be represented by it. In October, 1906, 
Mr. Minns paid to the Treasurer the sum of $ 800, to be added 
to this deposit book. All the papers relating to these trans- 
actions are in the Society's box in the Union Safe Deposit 
Vaults. The interest on the deposits is to be used for the 
purchase of books for the Library ; and the deposit book itself 
is to be kept as an interesting relic of the earlier time. It is 
worthy of notice that a former Treasurer and President of this 
Society, James Savage, was one of the founders and afterward 
President of the Provident Institution, and that the two cor- 
porations were for a considerable period joint owners of the 
estate on Tremont Street which they jointly occupied. 

As these two deposit books represent prescribed investments 
for special purposes, they are not included in the General Fund, 
and do not appear in the Trial Balance ; but they form never- 
theless a part of the Society's assets, and it will probably be 
desirable hereafter to include them as special funds wholly 
independent of the Consolidated Income, which is propor- 
tionately distributed among the other funds. 

It should not be forgotten that besides the gifts and bequests 
represented by these funds, which the Treasurer is required to 
take notice of in his Annual Report, numerous gifts have been 
made to the Society from time to time, and expended for the 
purchase of the real estate, or in promoting the objects for 
which the Society was organized. A detailed account of these 
gifts was included in the Annual Report of the Treasurer, 
dated March 31, 1887, printed in the Proceedings (2d series, 
vol. hi. pp. 291-296) ; and in the list of the givers there enu- 
merated will be found the names of many honored associates, 
now living or departed, and of other gentlemen, not members 
of the Society, who were interested in the promotion of histori- 
cal studies. They gave liberally in the day of small things ; 
and to them the Society is largely indebted for its present 
prosperity and usefulness. 


To the benefactors there mentioned must be added Charles 
Francis Adams, President of the Society, who, in the sum- 
mer of 1895, bought a lot of land on the Fenway (3,000 
square feet), with a view of adding it to the lot bought by 
the Society, in case the latter should prove too small. When 
the plans for the new building were drawn, it was found to 
be desirable to make some change in the lines of the Society's 
estate, and the lot bought by the President was conveyed to 
the Society, with a verbal understanding that he should re- 
ceive for it an equal quantity of land on Boylston Street. In 
February, 1901, a portion of unoccupied land on Boylston 
Street (2,622^ square feet) was sold to indemnify the Presi- 
dent for the land conveyed by him to the Society. The dif- 
ference (83,000) between the sum paid by the President 
(115,000) and the amount received for the land sold ($12,000) 
was an absolute gift to the Society, and to this difference must 
be added the interest on 115,000 from the date of the original 
purchase up to the date of sale of the Boylston Street land, a 
period of nearly six years. 

The stock and bonds held by the Treasurer as investments 
on account of the above-mentioned funds are as follows : — 

$14,000 in the five per cent mortgage bonds of the Chicago and 
West Michigan Railroad Co., due 1921 ; 

$1,000 in a five per cent bond of the Chicago and North Michigan 
Railroad Co., due 1931 ; 

$5,000 in the four per cent bonds of the Rio Grande Western Rail- 
road Co., due 1939; 

$8,000 in the four per cent bonds of the Chicago, Burlington, and 
Quincy Railroad Co., due 1921 ; 

$2,000 in the four per cent bonds of the Chicago, Burlington, and 
Quincy Railroad Co., due 1922; 

$4,000 in the three and one-half per cent bonds of the Chicago, 
Burlington, and Quincy Railroad Co., due 1949 ; 

$5,000 in the five per cent gold bonds of the Cincinnati, Dayton, 
and Ironton Railroad Co., due 1941 ; 

$14,500 in the four per cent mortgage bonds of the Atchison, 
Topeka, and Santa Fe Railroad Co., due 1995 ; 

$9,000 in the adjustment four per cent bonds, due 1995; $3,000 
in the convertible four per cent bonds, due 1995 ; and one hundred and 
fifty-eight shares of the preferred stock of the same corporation ; 

$13,000 in the five per cent collateral trust bonds of the Chicago 
Junction Railways and Union Stock Yards Co., due 1915 ; 


$10,000 in the five per cent bonds of the Oregon Short Line Railroad 
Co., due 1946; 

$10,000 in the four per cent bonds of the Oregon Short Line Railroad 
Co., due 1929; 

$ 1 2,000 in the five per cent bonds of the Le wiston-Concord Bridge Co., 
due 1924; 

$6,000 in the four and one half per cent bonds of the Boston and 
Maine Railroad Co., due 1944 ; 

$10,000 in the four per cent bonds of the American Telephone and 
Telegraph Co., due 1929 ; 

$54,000 in the four per cent joint bonds of the Northern Pacific Rail- 
road Co. and the Great Northern Railroad Co., due 1921 ; 

$12,000 in the convertible five per cent bonds of the Kansas City- 
Stock Yards Co., due 1913 ; 

$6,000 in the four per cent bonds of the Long Island Railroad Co., 
due 1949; 

$12,000 in the four per cent bonds of the New York Central and 
Hudson River Railroad Co., due 1934 ; 

$10,000 in the four per cent bonds of the Bangor and Aroostook 
Railroad Co., due 1951 ; 

$4,500 in the seven per cent bonds of the Atchison and Nebraska 
Railroad Co., due 1908; 

$22,000 in the four per cent bonds of the Burlington and Missouri 
River Railroad Co. in Nebraska, due 1910; 

$2,000 in the four per cent bonds of the Detroit, Grand Rapids and 
Western Railroad Co., due 1946 ; 

$9,000 in the four per cent bonds of the Fitchburg Railroad Co., due 

$3,000 in the five per cent bonds of the Kansas City, Clinton and 
Springfield Railroad Co., due 1925; 

$2,000 in the five per cent bonds of the Lowell, Lawrence and 
Haverhill Street Railway Co., due 1923 ; 

$6,000 in the four per cent bonds of the West End Street Railway 
Co., due 1915; 

$25,000 in the six per cent mortgage notes of G. St. L. Abbott, 
Trustee ; 

$3,500 in the mortgage note of A. & C. F. Ammand, guaranteed by 
Charles F. Adams ; 

$2,400 in the mortgage note of J. H. & M. M. Annis, guaranteed by 
Charles F. Adams ; 

Fifty shares in the Merchants' National Bank of Boston ; 

Fifty shares in the State National Bank of Boston ; 

Fifty shares in the National Bank of Commerce of Boston ; 

Fifty shares in the National Union Bank of Boston ; 


Fifty shares in the Second National Bank of Boston ; 

Twenty-five shares in the National Shawmut Bank of Boston ; 

Thirty-five shares in the Boston and Albany Railroad Co.; 

Twenty-five shares in the Old Colony Railroad Co. ; 

Twenty-five shares in the preferred stock of the Fitchburg Rail- 
road Co. ; 

One hundred and fifty shares in the preferred stock of the Chicago 
Junction Railways and Union Stock Yards Co. ; 

Two hundred and fifty shares in the preferred stock of the American 
Smelting and Refining Co. ; 

Three hundred and two shares in the Kansas City Stock Yards Co. ; 

Ten shares in the Cincinnati Gas and Electric Co., received in ex- 
change for five shares in the Cincinnati Gas-Light and Coke Co. ; 

Six shares in the Boston Real Estate Trust (of the par value of $1,000); 

Five shares in the State Street Exchange ; and 

Three shares in the Pacific Mills (of the par value of $1,000). 

The net cost of these securities is $434,080.89 ; but their market value 
is much higher. 

The following abstracts and the trial balance show the pres- 
ent condition of the several accounts : — 


1906. DEBITS ' 

March 31. To balance on hand $1,820.37 


March 30. „ receipts as follows : — 

General Account $1,593.91 

Consolidated Income 22,384.49 

Income of Richard Frothingham Fund . 66.50 
Income of R. C. Billings Fund .... 30.00 


General Fund 150.00 

Chamberlain Bequest 4,542.01 

Investments 12,000.00 

$42 ,587.28 

March 30. To balance brought down $3,327.60 

1907. CBBDim 
March 30. By payments as follows : — 

Investments $22,350.50 

Income of W. Winthrop Fund .... $68.00 
Income of E. B. Bigelow Fund .... 146.33 

Income of Savage Fund 199.52 

Carried forward $413.85 $22,350.50 



Brought forward $413.85 $22,350.50 

Income of Lowell Fund 1,395.62 

Income of Waterston Publishing Fund . 1.25 

Income of J. L. Sibley Fund .... 2,462.35 
Income of C. A. L. Sibley Fund . . . 255.17 

Income of Appleton Fund 1,137.79 

Income of Peabody Fund ...... 355.32 

Income of Mass. Historical Trust Fund . 66.00 

Income of General Fund 67.10 

Chamberlain Bequest 3,090.90 

Consolidated Income 54.58 

Waterston Library 30.00 

General Account 7,579.25 


By balance on hand 3,327.60 



1907. DEBITS ' • 

March 30. To sundry charges and payments : — 

Salaries of Librarian's Assistants . . . $2,799.00 

Services of Janitor 960.00 

Printing and binding 110.10 

Stationery and postage 106.36 

Light 83.61 

Water 73.00 

Coal and wood 587.00 

Miscellaneous expenses 591.53 

Editing publications of the Society . . . 2,000.00 

Repairs 268.65 

$7,579 25 

To balance carried forward 1,486.90 



March 30. By balance brought forward $1,738.66 

„ sundry receipts : — 

Interest $95.49 

Admission Fees 150.00 

Assessments 620.00 

Sales of publications 725.82 

Copyright, etc 2.60 


Income of General Fund 2,377.02 

Income of Ellis Fund 1,782.05 

Income of Dowse Fund 562.81 

Income of C. A. L. Sibley Fund 1,011.70 

March 30. By balance brought down $1,486.90 


Income of General Fund. 

1907. DEBITS. 

March 30 To amount paid for printing and binding $67.10 

„ amount carried to General Account ....... 2,377.02 

. $2,444.12 

1907. CREDITS. 

March 30. By proportion of consolidated income $2,444.12 


Income of J. L. Sibley Fund. 



March 30. To payments in accordance with the will $2,462 35 

„ amount added to principal of J. L. Sibley Fund . . . 2,236.22 

,, balance carried forward 6,849.68 


1906. credits. 

March 31. By balance brought forward $2,603.37 

March 30. „ proportion of consolidated income 8,944.88 

March 30. By balance brought down $6,849.68 

Income of C. A. L. Sibley Fund. 

1907. DEBITS - 

March 30. To amount paid for books, etc $255.17 

„ balance carried to General Account 1,011.70 


1907. CREDITS ' 
March 30. By proportion of consolidated income $1,286.87 

( Income of Ellis Fund 


March 30. To amount carried to General Account ....... $1,782.05 


March 30. By proportion of consolidated income $1,782.05 


Income of E. B. Bigelow Fund. 

1907. DEBITS ' 

March 80. To amount paid for books $146.33 

„ balance carried forward 560.89 


1906. CREDITS. 

March 31. By balance brought forward $594.66 


March 30. „ proportion of consolidated income 112.56 

' $707.22 

March 30. By balance brought forward $560.89 

Income of Massachusetts Historical Trust Fund. 

1907. DEBITS ' 

March 30. To amount paid for sundries $66.00 

„ balance carried forward 3,691 84 


1906. * CREDITS. 

March 31. By balance brought forward .... ..... $3,195.03 

March 30. „ proportion of consolidated income 562.81 

March 30. By balance brought forward $3,691.84 

Income of Peabody Fund. 

1907.' DEB,TS - 
March 30. To amount paid for printing, binding, and " Index " . . . $355.32 
„ balance carried forward 3,805.76 


1906. credits. 

March 31. By balance brought forward $2,916.00 

March 30. „ proportion of consolidated income 1,245.08 


March 30. By balance brought down $3,805.76 


Income of Richard Frothingham Fund. 

1906. CREDIT8 ' 

March 31. By amount brought forward $1,904.32 


March 30. „ copyright received 66.50 

„ proportion of consolidated income 168.84 

March 30. By balance brought down $2,139.66 

Income of Savage Fund. 

1906. DEBITS - 

March 31. To balance brought forward $222.10 

March 30. „ amount paid for books 199.52 


March 30. To balance brought forward $83.94 

1907. CREDITS - 

March 30. By proportion of consolidated income $337.68 

„ balance carried forward 83.94 

Income of Dowse Fund. 



March 30. To amount transferred to General Account $562.81 



March 30. By proportion of consolidated income $562.81 

Income of William Winthrop Fund. 

1907. DEBITS. 

March 30. To amount paid for binding $68 00 

„ balance carried forward 629 .68 



March 31. By balance brought forward $416.28 

March 30. „ proportion of consolidated income 281.40 

March 30. By amount brought forward $629.68 


Income of Appleton Fund. 

1907. DEBITS. 

March 30. To amount paid for printing "Collections " $1,137.79 

„ balance carried forward 4,119.47 


1906. CREDITS. 

March 31. By amount brought forward $4,570.46 

March 30. „ proportion of consolidated income 686.80 


March 30. By balance brought forward $4,119.47 

Chamberlain Bequest. 

1907. DEBIT8> 

March 30. To amount paid on account of " History " $3,090.90 

„ balance carried forward 5,385.14 



March 31. By balance brought forward $3,682.52 


March 30. „ amount received from the executors 4,542.01 

„ amount of interest added 251.51 


March 30. By balance brought down $5,385.14 

Water ston Publishing Fund. 

1907. DEBITS " 
March 30. To amount paid for publishing " Proceedings " .... $1.25 

„ balance carried forward 5,165.06 


1906. CREDITS. 

March 31. By amount brought forward $4,603.50 

March 30. „ proportion of consolidated income 562.81 

March 30. By balance brought down $5,165.06 


Income of Lowell Fund. 

1907. DEBITS. 

March 30. To amount paid for " Proceedings " $1,895.62 

„ balance brought forward 96.60 


1906. CREDITS. 

March 31. By amount brought forward $1,323.38 

March 30. „ proportion of consolidated income 168.84 


March 30. By balance brought down $96.60 

Income of R. C. Billings Fund. 



March 30. To amount carried forward $729.29 

1906. CREDITS. 

March 31. By balance brought forward .......... $136.48 


March 30. „ amount received on account of " Proceedings " . . 30.00 

„ proportion of consolidated income 562.81 


March 30. By balance brought down $729.29 



Cash $3,327.60 

Investments 434,080.89 

Real Estate 97,990.32 

Income of Savage Fund 83.94 



Building Account $72,990.32 

Ellis House 25,000.00 

Appleton Fund 12,203.00 

Dowse Fund . 10,000.00 

Massachusetts Historical Trust Fund 10,000.00 

Peabody Fund 22,123.00 

Savage Fund 6,000.00 

Erastus B. Bigelow Fund 2,000.00 

William Winthrop Fund 5,000.00 

Carried forward $165,316.32 


Brought forward $165,816.32 

Richard Frotiiingham Fund 3,000.00 

General Fund 43,427.43 

Anonymous Fund 3,461.89 

William Amory Fund 3,000.00 

Lawrence Fund 3,000.00 

Robert C. Winthrop Fund 10,000.00 

Waterston Publishing Fund 10,000.00 

Ellis Fund 31,663.66 

Lowell Fund 3,000.00 

Waterston Fund 5,000.00 

Waterston Fund No. 2 10,000.00 

Robert Charles Billings Fund 10,000.00 

John Langdon Sibley Fund 161,169.33 

Charlotte A. L. Sibley Fund 22,509.48 

Thomas L. Winthrop Fund 2,231.49 

General Account 1,486.90 

Chamberlain Bequest 5,385.14 

Waterston Library 3,917.14 

Income of Lowell Fund 96.60 

Income of Appleton Fund 4,119.47 

Income of William Winthrop Fund 629.68 

Income of Massachusetts Historical Trust Fund 3,691.84 

Income of Richard Frotiiingham Fund 2,139.66 

Income of William Amory Fund 1,287.35 

Income of E. B. Bigelow Fund 560.89 

Income of Lawrence Fund 550.66 

Income of Robert C. Winthrop Fund 3,626.08 

Income of Waterston Publishing Fund 5,165.06 

Income of Waterston Fund , . . . 743.79 

Income of Waterston Fund No. 2 . 3,918.16 

Income of Robert C. Billings Fund . . . . 729.29 

Income of Peabody Fund 3,805.76 

Income of J. L. Sibley Fund 6,849.68 


The income for the year derived from the investments and 
credited to the several funds, in proportion to the amount at 
which they stand on the Treasurer's books, was about five 
and five-eighths per cent. 

In submitting his final Report as Treasurer, and declining a 
re-election, the undersigned gratefully recognizes, as did his 
immediate predecessor, the Hon. Richard Frothingham, thirty 
years ago, the pleasant relations which have existed with the 
other members of the Society, and especially with the Council. 
In succession the undersigned and his predecessor have held 
the office for sixty years, or more than half the period which 
has elapsed since the formation of the Society. The unbroken 
harmony of so long a term of service is significant of the spirit 


in which the work of the founders has been carried on by- 
successive generations. 

It may not be without interest to cast a glance backward 
over the financial history of these sixty years. When Mr. 
Frothingham was elected Treasurer in 1847, the Society owned 
a quarter part of the estate on Tremont Street which was occu- 
pied jointly by it and the Provident Institution for Savings, 
and which had cost $6,500. There were no invested funds, 
and the whole amount in the treasury was $1,113.49. " The 
ordinary receipts of the Society," wrote the retiring Treasurer 
at that time, " are derived from the annual subscription of 
three dollars for each member, and eight dollars admission 
fee." The total receipts in the first year of Mr. Frothingham's 
term were $270.79. When he declined a re-election in 1877, 
the Society owned the new building in Tremont Street, which 
had cost (including the original purchase) $103,280.19, and 
was subject to mortgages amounting in the aggregate to 
$85,203, leaving an equity in the estate of $18,077.19 ; there 
were six permanent funds of the aggregate amount of 
$52,349.25, including three which had been invested in the 
new building ; and there were cash and notes receivable in 
the treasury to the amount of $7,495.71. 

The present condition of the Society is shown in detail in 
the foregoing statements and abstracts ; but it may be con- 
venient to give the summary in a single sentence. The real 
estate, which is entirely unincumbered, stands on the books at 
$97,990.32, but is valued by the city assessors at $196,000 ; 
the aggregate amount of the twenty-two permanent funds 
is $388,789.28, which, together with unexpended balances 
and income, is represented by stocks and bonds costing 
$434,080.89, but worth much more than their cost, and by 
$3,327.60 in cash. There are also two deposit books in Sav- 
ings Banks for about $1,000, held for special trusts. 

The undersigned can wish for his successors in the next 
sixty years nothing better than an equally unbroken record of 
harmony and of growth in the means of usefulness. 

Charles C. Smith, 


Boston, March 30, 1907. 


Report of the Auditing Committee. 

The undersigned, a Committee appointed to examine the 
accounts of the Treasurer of the Massachusetts Historical 
Society, as made up to March 30, 1907, have attended to that 
duty, and report that they find them correctly kept and prop- 
erly vouched ; that the securities held by the Treasurer for 
the several funds correspond with the statement in his Annual 
Report ; that the balance of cash on hand is satisfactorily 
accounted for; and that the Trial Balance is accurately taken 
from the Ledger. 

James F. Hunnewell, 
Thomas Minns, 

Boston, April 4, 1907. 

Mr. James F. Hunnewell, for the Auditing Committee, 
suggested that hereafter the Committee should have power to 
employ an expert paid accountant to examine the books and 
accounts of the Treasurer, and on his motion the, matter was 
referred to the Council with power. 

The Librarian read his Report, as follows : 

Report of the Librarian. 
During the year there have been added to the Library : 

Books 509 

Pamphlets 843 

Bound volumes of newspapers 84 

Unbound volumes of newspapers 32 

Broadsides 26 

Maps 1 

Manuscripts 576 

Bound volumes of manuscripts 2 

In all 2,073 

Of the volumes added, 371 have been given, 102 bought, 
and 36 formed by binding. Of the pamphlets added, 627 
have been given, 210 bought, and 6 procured by exchange. 

From the income of the Savage Fund there have been 
bought 53 volumes, 6Q pamphlets, and 4 single newspapers ; 
and 4 volumes of newspapers have been bound. 

From the income of the E. B. Bigelow Fund there have 


been bought 12 volumes, 5 pamphlets, 9 bound volumes of 
newspapers, and 86 single newspapers; and 14 volumes of 
newspapers have been bound. 

From the income of the John Langdon Sibley Fund there 
have been bought 10 volumes, 22 pamphlets, 21 unbound 
volumes of newspapers, and 9 broadsides ; and 1 volume of 
newspaper cuttings has been. bound, and 3 volumes have been 
repaired, all relating to Harvard College; and from that of 
the Charlotte A. L. Sibley Fund, 18 volumes, 117 pamphlets, 
247 single newspapers, 55Q manuscripts, and 3 volumes have 
been bound. 

From the income of the William Winthrop Fund there have 
been bound 2 volumes of manuscripts and 12 volumes of news- 
papers ; and from that of the General Fund 3 volumes have 
been repaired. 

In the collection of manuscripts there are now 1,190 volumes, 
192 unbound volumes, 97 pamphlets with manuscript notes, 
and 15,081 manuscripts. 

Of the books added to the Rebellion Department, 10 volumes 
have been given, and 35 bought ; and of the pamphlets added, 
31 have been given, and 66 bought. There are now in the 
collection 3,105 volumes, 5,958 pamphlets, 485 broadsides, and 
110 maps. 

The cabinet, made at the charge of the John Langdon 
Sibley Fund for the safe keeping of the Sibley papers, was 
received and put in place on May 2, 1906, and is a worthy 
companion to the Parkman and Winthrop cabinets. 

From the estate of the late Charles E. French there have 
been received 132 volumes, 230 pamphlets, 31 bound volumes, 
1 unbound volume and , many single numbers of newspapers, 
besides a collection of loose manuscript papers, containing some 
letters of Signers of the Declaration of Independence, of 
members of Congress, and of other noted persons, 44 broad- 
sides, and 1 map. 

The work of moving the books to the stacks vacated by the 
American Academy of Arts and Sciences has been completed. 

The Library contains at the present time 49,842 volumes, 
109,675 pamphlets, and 4,718 broadsides. 
Respectfully submitted, 

Samuel A. Green, Librarian. 

April 11, 1907. 


The Report of the Cabinet-Keeper was read: 

Report of the Cabinet-Keeper. 

During the past year gifts have been received for the Cabinet 
as follows : 

A marble bast of James Savage, President of the Massachusetts 
Historical Society from 1841 to 1855, a reproduction by F. C. Recchia, 
of Boston, of the original, modelled by John C. King for the Provident 
Institution for Savings, now in its possession. Given by Mrs. William 
B. Rogers. 

A medal struck in commemoration of the two hundred and fiftieth 
anniversary of the settlement of the Jews in the United States. Given 
by the American Jewish Historical Society. 

A photograph of a memorial stone to Joseph Hills and Dr. John 
Sprague, erected by Deloraine P. Corey on the lawn of the First 
Baptist Church, Maiden, September, 1905. Given by Mr. Corey. 

A bronze medal, by Tiffany & Company, New York, struck by Act 
of Congress in commemoration of the two hundredth anniversary of 
the birth of Benjamin Franklin. Given by the American Philosophical 
Society of Philadelphia. 

An engraving of the Earl of Buchan (a Corresponding Member of 
this Society, 1808-1829), by J. Fmlayson, published November 22, 
1765, after a painting by Sir Joshua Reynolds, bearing the inscription: 
" To J. Otis, Esquire of Boston, &c. &c. in New England as a mark of 
my Attachment to the cause of Liberty & its friends.'' Given by Mrs. 
William B. Rogers. 

An oil portrait of Mrs. Mary Ann (Faneuil) Jones, a sister of Peter 
Faneuil, painted by Smibert, a companion to our painting of Faneuil 
by the same artist, given in 1835 by Charles Faneuil and Eliza Jones. 
Given by Miss Mary Ann Jones, a great-granddaughter. 

Six cancelled steel plates of the Cambridge City Bank used in 
printing bills, $1, $2, $3, $5, $10, $20. Given by George Eliot 

An engraving, entitled "A Prospect of the Colledges in Cambridge 
in New England," by Sidney L. Smith, 1906, after a colored print in 
the possession of this Society, inscribed to William Dummer, Acting- 
Governor, 1726, by W. Burgis. Given by Charles E. Goodspeed. 

A photogravure portrait of Robert C. Winthrop, Jr., by A. W. Elson 
& Company, after a crayon sketch by B. C. Porter, 1877, (a large 
India paper impression of the portrait which appears in the Publica- 
tions of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts.) Given by Henry H. 


Six cancelled steel plates of the Hamilton Bank, Boston, used in 
printing bills since 1830. Given by Henry G. Denny. 

Four photographs : one of Governor John Hancock, two of Thomas 
Hancock, and one of Mrs. Lydia Henchman Hancock, of Boston, all 
from portraits by John Singleton Copley, formerly belonging to 
Washington Hancock, of London, England. Given by Thomas Minns. 

An oil portrait of the Rev. Edmund F. Slafter by F. W. Simmons, 
bequeathed to the Society by Dr. Slafter. 

A copperplate engraving, from the unfinished plate by Edward 
Savage belonging to this Society, of Congress voting Independence ; 
printed November 8, 1906, by John A. Lowell & Company. Given 
by Charles E. Goodspeed. 

Gilbert Stuart's snuff-box, bearing on the cover an engraving with 
the legend, — " Com. Perry Capturing the Whole of the British fleet 
on Lake Erie, September 10, 1813"; on the bottom is engraved a 
letter of his of the same date speaking of the victory. A manuscript 
inside the box says : " At one time he lived in Roxbury, and was an 
intimate friend of Joseph Ruggles, Jr., and they exchanged snuff boxes, 
because J. R. had one which opened with a hinge, and G. S. preferred 
it to this one." 

Two silver spoons saved by Miss Relief Ellery, on the morning of 
June 17, 1775, when the firing on Charlestown caused her to leave her 
home there ; Faneuil Hall Lottery tickets, January, 1768, signed by 
Joseph Jackson; a bill of the United States, January 14, 1779, $65; 
of Massachusetts Bay, May 5, 1780, $20; of New Jersey, March 25, 
1776, one shilling, and three shillings; of the Kirtland (Ohio) Safety 
Society Bank, March 7, 1837, $1. Given by Miss Anna Sophia 

A photograph of a part of the Flag of the Third New York regi- 
ment, 1778 or 1779, carried at Yorktown in 1781, showing the arms 
painted alike on both sides of the flag ; photographed by Lorey, Albany, 
January, 1907, from the original in the possession of Mrs. Abraham 
Lansing of that city. Two photographs of a part of the flag of the 
Second Battalion, Second Connecticut Regiment, showing the arms of 
the Colony on one side and on the other the letters, " II. Bat. II Reg : 
Connecticut Raised 1640." Given by Gherardi Davis. 

s> A bronze medal to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the death 
of Thomas Robbins, D.D. Given by the Connecticut Historical 

During the year Mr. William Sumner Appleton has arranged 
the collection of coins and medals bequeathed to this Society 
by his father, and I have received from him the following 
letter : 


Boston, 9 April, 1907. 

Dear Mr. Norcross, — I have just finished arranging the coins 
for you, and now write very briefly to tell you in what order I have 
placed them. 

I began with the Colonial coinage and then the early American 
tokens. This was the portion of the collection which appealed most 
strongly to my father, and it is accordingly the best represented. Per- 
haps the most valuable piece of the lot is the N. E. Ill pence, of which 
but one other specimen is known, namely, that in the possession of 
Yale College. It seems peculiarly fortunate that there should be one 
specimen of this coin still within the limits of the Commonwealth. I 
cannot at the moment recall another collection of Massachusetts coins 
accessible to the public anywhere in the state. The other gems in this 
part of the collection are too numerous to mention, but they include 
many pieces of which less than a half dozen specimens are known to 

Next follow the regular series of U. S. coins and Pattern pieces, of 
which the most valuable is undoubtedly the 1804 dollar. This is the. 
best known of the few originals, and came from the Mickley collection. 
Other rarities are beautiful specimens of the scarce 1796 and 1797 half 
dollars, the latter being probably the finest known. Scarce cents 
include uncirculated 1793s of scarce varieties, choice 1799 and 
1804, etc. 

Next in order I have placed the later American tokens, store cards, 
etc., and after these the bulk of the American medals. I have made 
no attempt to classify these medals. They can be arranged in many 
different ways, and if you wish, I shall be glad to look them over at 
some later date when I have the time. Prominent among these medals 
is the so-called li Diplomatic medal." This medal is excessively rare, 
if not indeed unique. I know my father valued this piece very highly, 
and described it fully at a meeting of your Society. 

Next in order come the Washington medals. These represent a 
curious and interesting assemblage of good, bad, and indifferent pieces. 
Their values vary fully as much as their artistic merit. A number of 
these medals are unique. The Washington medals are arranged in 
the order in which they are described in my father's printed catalogue, 
of which the Society has a copy. A printed number laid beside the 
medal refers it to the catalogue. As the collection doubled in size 
after the catalogue was printed, there are many pieces not in proper 

Following these medals I have arranged the Washington and Lafay- 
ette medals. As their number is not very large, I have made no 
attempt to arrange them in any special order. 

The Admiral Vernon medals bring up the rear. 


Altogether there are about 3,423 coins and medals and 987 pieces of 
paper money, the whole of which were valued for the estate at about 

In conclusion let me make the following suggestion. As the collec- 
tion will probably be examined from time to time by persons with little 
or no knowledge of numismatics, it would be well that they should all 
be warned to touch only the edges of the coins, never the faces. 

Believe me 

Yours very truly, 

(Signed) Wm. Sumner Appleton. 

The Appleton collection and the cabinet containing miscel- 
laneous coins already owned by the Society have been placed 
in the small room on the third floor. 

The Cabinet room on the ground floor is much crowded, and 
I hope that in the near future the Society may see its way to 
build an addition on the land in the rear already owned by 
it, thus enlarging the room for the Cabinet. 
Respectfully submitted, 

Grenville H. Norcross. 

Boston, April 11, 1907. 

Mr. Waldo Lincoln, chairman of the Committee appointed 
to examine the Library and Cabinet, presented their Report: 

Report of the Committee on the Library and Cabinet. 

The Committee appointed to examine the Library and Cabi- 
net of the Society has attended to its duties with the courteous 
assistance of the Librarian, Dr. Green, and the Cabinet-Keeper, 
Mr. Norcross. 

The Cabinet is as well arranged as is possible in the limited 
space devoted to it. It is unfortunate that so valuable and 
interesting a collection should be so crowded together as to 
lose much of its character, and, if more room can possibly be 
found for its display, it seems advisable to distribute it through 
other rooms. Possibly the upper halls and the room lately 
vacated by the Academy of Arts and Sciences could be safely 
used for this purpose, or perhaps some of the articles could, 
with not too great inconvenience, be kept in Ellis Hall. 

The Society having during the past year come into posses- 
sion of the valuable Appleton collection of coins, the Committee, 
at the suggestion of Mr. Norcross, who professes to have no 


great knowledge of numismatics, advises the appointment of a 
curator of coins, one of whose duties would be to keep the 
collection of American coins and medals up to date, — a matter 
which will entail but slight annual expense and in the end 
may prove of great value. 

Of the Library but little needs to be said. During the year 
the greater part of the Society's Library has been removed to 
the steel stack formerly used by the Academy of Arts and 
Sciences, leaving many of the old wooden cases vacant. As 
the Committee understands that the Society carries no insur- 
ance on its collections, it would seem safer to remove the 
unused cases and to replace those in use, as rapidly as may 
be practical, with steel cases uniform with those used for the 
newspapers and Rebellion records. 

A very commendable method of preserving our early and 
most valuable files of newspapers has been adopted during the 
past year, which provides much greater safety against damage 
by their use, and room for the insertion, without rebinding, of 
missing numbers as they are gradually acquired. 

There are in our Library nearly five hundred volumes of 
bound pamphlets, averaging ten pamphlets to a volume, which 
are counted only as so many volumes. As in most libraries 
such pamphlets are counted as individual volumes, we advise 
the adoption of the same system, that our Library may have 
credit for its real size and importance. 

Waldo Lincoln. 
R. B. Merriman. 
Lindsay Swift. 

April, 1907. 

Mr. Thomas L. Livermore, chairman of the Committee to 
nominate officers for the ensuing year, presented the following 
list of candidates, who were duly elected by ballot : 

For President. 

For Vice-Presidents. 

For Recording Secretary. 


For Corresponding Secretary. 

For Treasurer. 

For Librarian. 

For Cabinet-Keeper. 

For Members at Large of the Council. 

Dr. Green having been elected to two offices, Mr. Melville 
M. Bigelow was, on motion of Mr. Livermore, elected an 
additional member of the Council, in order that that body 
should be composed of thirteen individual members. 

Mr. Albert B. Hart called attention to the fact that Mr. 
Charles C. Smith had declined a re-election as Treasurer after 
a faithful service of thirty years in that office, and spoke of 
the great obligation of the Society to Mr. Smith for his de- 
votion to its interests and for his promotion of those interests 
in many ways. On motion of Mr. Hart, seconded by Mr. 
William R. Thayer, the President was requested to prepare a 
minute, to be presented at the next meeting, expressive of the 
indebtedness of the Society to Mr. Smith, and its gratitude 
toward him. 

Hon. JohnD. Long read the following paper, which elicited 
interesting recollections and remarks from the President, 
and Messrs. Melville M. Bigelow, William R. Thayer, 
William W. Goodwin, Henry W. Haynes, and A. B. Hart. 

On a Reference to W. H. Seward in Carl Schurz's 

I suppose nothing is more generally recognized, not by the 
large body of the unthinking, but by those who have given the 
matter consideration, than the worthlessness of the details of 
much historical or biographical statement — especially so far 



as these are applied to the estimate of personal character and 
motive. It is not within human ability to state the truth, the 
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, except in cases so 
exceptionally rare, and limited to such an immediate and 
circumscribed circle that they only prove the rule. It is for 
this reason that the law, which in its system is the highest 
mark of common sense, excludes hearsay testimony and also 
oral evidence when written can be had ; that it hears both 
sides and abhors an ex parte statement; and that till recent 
years it excluded the testimony of any witness having an inter- 
est, however small, in the issue in hand, and now permits this 
only on the ground, which is a very shaky one, that court and 
jury can make proper discount for human bias and selfishness. 
For this reason also the law requires that every witness be 
subject to the most searching cross-examination, without 
which I doubt whether, under her searching questioning, any 
member even of this eminent body is believed by his wife or 
whether he accepts any statement made by a member of his 
own family. And even with all these safeguards the verdict — 
verwn dictum — of a legal tribunal often belies its name and 
does not always tell the truth. 

And yet the moment we pass out of the court of law and 
enter the unrestricted public domain of free and unquestioned 
speech, we accept what we hear said or read written, often as 
if it were gospel truth. Every day every public man is likely 
to find a statement about himself in the daily newspaper, 
nothing more it may be than where he missed a railroad train 
or ate his lunch, and of course he invariably finds it incorrect. 
And yet the same man accepts any newspaper item about other 
people as something to be relied on. And these items become, 
to some extent, the staple of biography and history, and to 
a still greater extent the coloring of the pictures of the men 
whose history or biography is told. 

Nobody to-day knows what were the facts about the attitude 
of Fitz-John Porter toward his commander-in-chief, General 
Pope, and in the nebulous mass of statement and gossip and 
interested assertion in which the truth is now left, it never 
can be ascertained. Who was right about the Confederate 
charge at Gettysburg, Lee or Longstreet ? Nobody will ever 
know, just as nobody will ever know the truth about Judas 
Iscariot. The narratives of Herodotus or Livv or Ceesar fur- 


irish no trustworthy evidence on which the motive or conduct 
of Greek or Persian, Roman or Gaul, can be justly judged. 
Cicero's word is only that of a partisan advocate. Even our 
Mr. Rhodes, a very truth-seeker and the fairest-intentioned of 
recent historians, writes like a lawyer arguing for a defendant 
when he discusses his old neighbor Garfield's connection with 
the Credit Mobilier investigation. Cromwell and Napoleon 
are each any number of creatures, devils or gods, according to 
the angle at which this or that critic has happened to adjust 
the camera in which he took their photographs. 

No man can clarify his writing so entirely from his own 
mental phases that they will not tinge the stream of his state- 
ment. There has never yet therefore been such a statement 
so limpid that the eye could see through it, as through a glass 
absolutely transparent, to the pebbles of fact at the bottom, 
revealing them unrefracted and in their exact dimensions, 
proportions, and relations. So much is always the phraseology 
affected by the personality of the writer with reference, not 
only to the verbal form but to the subject matter treatment, 
that we say it is " his style." Read a page without giving 
the name of the author, and the scholarly listener will say at 
once, Why, that is Macaulay, Carlisle, or John C. Ropes, or 
Charles Francis Adams, or, peradventure, Theodore Roosevelt. 

Then, too, there is always the fatal desire to be interesting, 
— a desire which sometimes snatches at gossip just as bias 
snatches at a straw. 

In short, statements of historical facts are to be taken with 
a grain of salt, too many with the largest dose, and the per- 
sonages of histoiy are in too large part the misty figures of 
exaggeration or depreciation or gossip. We indulge in the 
pleasing fallacy, which we so often hear expressed, that true 
history can only be written after a lapse of years. Really that 
is only another way of saying that a century or two will 
swallow into oblivion most of the fables, and that those which 
are toughest and therefore survive will be adopted as the truth. 

But I was not intending to enlarge on this familiar line. 
My purpose is rather to refer to an instance of its working 
which occurred to me, not as a special admirer of Mr. Seward, 
but as a reader of contemporaneous magazine literature. I 
refer to that chapter in Carl Schurz's autobiographical remi- 
niscences in which he refers to Mr. Seward. Very handsomely 



Schurz, narrating that Mr. Seward objected to giving Schurz 
the mission to Spain notwithstanding the latter's splendid 
services during the Lincoln electoral campaign, says that Mr. 
Seward was right in his view in this respect, and that on good 
diplomatic grounds it was not wise to send to one European 
court a man who had just escaped from the penalties of insur- 
gency and rebellion against another. But, on the other hand, 
and upon the same page, rather pettishly and unfairly I think, 
Mr. Schurz repeats at length and makes it forever a reflection 
upon Mr. Seward, an undoubtedly unjust fling, charging the 
latter not only with self-conceit, but with petulant contempt 
of President Lincoln. It seems that Lincoln insisted upon 
Schurz's appointment, and the statement of Schurz to which I 
refer is as follows : 

" When Mr. Lincoln took so peremptory a stand, Mr. Seward at 
last yielded, but not with good grace. Indeed the matter gave him 
occasion for a singular display of temper. One day Mr. Potter, 
accompanied by another Republican member of Congress from Wis- 
consin [where Mr. Schurz was then living], discussed the subject with 
Mr. Seward in his office at the State Department, and incidentally 
[note the word " incidentally," when of course the evident object of 
their interview was to press this candidacy] remarked that the failure 
to bestow such a distinction upon me would be a severe disappointment 
to a good many people. [It is interesting to note here that Mr. 
Schurz falls into the usual self-complacency of saying other people and 
not himself. The best of us when looking for an office always use the 
formula that it is our " friends " who insist on our candidacy and who 
will be unhappy if it is unsuccessful.] At this Mr. Seward jumped up 
from his chair, paced the floor excitedly, and exclaimed, ' Disappoint- 
ment ! You speak to me of disappointment ! To me who was justly 
entitled to the Republican nomination for the presidency and who had to 
stand aside and see it given to a little Illinois lawyer ! You speak to 
me of disappointment ! ' " 

In the first place is the improbability that Mr. Seward, who 
was not a fool, who had just come into Lincoln's Cabinet, and 
who knew that his success there must largely depend upon his 
good relation with his chief, would, in the presence of two 
Western members of Congress, make a stinging personal attack 
on Lincoln, knowing that it would be repeated to Schurz and 
to everybody else, after the manner of men who all dearly 
love to circulate an ill-natured remark. 


In the next place the thing is hearsay, and hearsay in the 
third degree. Schurz reports what he heard Potter say that 
Potter had heard Seward say. It is not pretended that any 
one of the parties wrote then and there what he heard. It is 
an attempt some time afterwards to put in writing what had 
been oral badinage and sword play between an office-seeker 
and an office-distributer. Indeed I think it does not appear 
to have ever been put in writing prior to the writing of Mr. 
Schurz's Reminiscences, — almost half a century later. Then, 
too, the truth of a conversation is not more in its words than in 
the manner and tone and facial expression and gesticulation 
of the speaker. The word "indeed" can be pronounced in 
four or five different ways, like the Japanese " yen," so as to 
convey four or five meanings, some of them exactly contrary 
one to another. It can mean assent ; it can mean dissent. 

Such testimony would not be taken in the lowest court of 
law in the pettiest case or to determine a question of property 
to the extent of a dollar and a half, and yet it will go into 
future history to affect and impair the character and reputation 
for all time of a distinguished American statesman. 

Then, too, Seward's words are put into the oratio directa 
form, which is always suspicious. He is quoted verbatim, 
word for word. But it is rare that any one man can, with 
exactness, state even the substance of the statement of another 
or reproduce the gesture, look, and manner which accompanied 
it and are a part of it. Still more true it is that no man can 
repeat the exact words of another, spoken only once and in 
hasty conversation, and not listened to with a view of memo- 
rizing them, if they exceed a dozen words. For instance, no 
person here listening to me can now, after a lapse of the five 
or six minutes since I began, repeat verbatim the first forty- 
five words I spoke in opening this paper, even if at that time 
he attempted to memorize them. Or even the last forty-five 
words I have just uttered. I say forty-five words, because 
that is the number in the quotation from Mr. Schurz to which 
I am referring. I do not believe that any one here can repeat 
the forty-five words of that quotation, although I have just 
called special attention to them and all of you probably 
recently read them in the magazine. 

The language imputed to Seward, even if correct, as of 
course it is not, is under the circumstances more consistent 


with joke, playfulness, or the politician's method of indirectly 
and evasively elbowing off a teasing Congressman than it is 
with a serious statement. The two Congressmen who heard 
it, coming away not in the most kindly frame of mind towards 
Mr. Seward, who had thrown cold water on their request, 
obliged to repeat to Mr. Schurz their failure and naturally 
swift to shift the blame for it on somebody else than them- 
selves, could easily give the reply of Mr. Seward any color or 
phraseology that suited them ; and of course the most offensive 
would suit them best. They might have said, u The old man 
was mad as a hatter, and damned you and the Republican 
convention that did n't nominate him. He went for old Abe 
and called him an Illinois county pettifogger." On the other 
hand, if Mr. Seward had at once complied with their demand, 
they would very likely have used the following : 
" When we told Seward that you would be disappointed if you 
do not get the Spanish mission, he rose from his chair and was 
very warm and cordial and jolly. He walked up to us and said, 
' Oh, in politics you know we all have our disappointments. 
The only sensible way is to take them philosophically. I had 
a pretty severe disappointment myself. A week before the 
convention everybody would have said that I was sure of 
the presidential nomination. Mr. Lincoln was little known 
outside Illinois. As a lawyer he was not at the head of the 
bar of his own State, and I don't know that he ever argued a 
case before the Supreme Court of the United States. But we 
underestimated him. He laid me out flat on my back. Here 
I am one of his Cabinet. But what a fool I should be to talk 
about disappointment ! ' " 

And finally, it is mighty unfair to put words— words that 
belittle the man to whom they are imputed — into the mouth 
of an absent fellow mortal who cannot correct their import or 
cross-examine the relater — especially in the mouth of a dead 
man whose lips are sealed forever. In this instance Mr. 
Seward has not been heard. Suppose, when Potter made his 
report to Schurz it had been reported back to Mr. Seward. 
Would it not be interesting to hear his version of the conversa- 
tion ? Or if it be said that he was an interested party, though 
he was not more interested than Potter or Schurz, would it 
not be interesting to hear the version of any other person who 
was present, and it is probable that other persons, even if only 


some clerk, were there ? In that case what do you think 
would become of this whole story? It would explode like an 
iridescent bubble, whereas it will henceforth be part of the 
bed rock of what we call history, confirmed by the justly great 
authority of Carl Schurz. Our children, summing up Mr. 
Seward, will say that he was a great figure, identified with 
the critical era of the antislavery reform, but that after all 
there was a mean streak in him ; he could not control his 
temper, he was jealous of Lincoln and stabbed him in the 
back when3ver he got a chance. 

If Mr. Schurz, who was a high-minded man, had thought 
twice, he would not have retained this ite.m, or, if he had, 
would have blue-pencilled the printer's proof of it. 

Now, to anticipate the very proper comment that may well 
be made on what I said at the beginning, if it be worthy of 
any comment at all, sight is not to be lost of the weighty fact 
and inestimable value of the new spirit of historical criticism, 
study, and writing. More than ever before it now sifts its 
material and runs it to the roots. It discards the rubbish. It 
searches for the truth and not for the show of things. It is at 
once the purpose and product of such a society as this. It 
cannot attain perfection. Human nature is too subtle in its 
tortuosities, and prejudice and bias are too inherent in it for 
that attainment. But it is true that its standard at least is 
now the standard of the truth. Veritas is the soul, if not the 
motto, of the Massachusetts Historical Society, and the modern 
historian is judged by his failure or success, not in reaching 
the absolute truth, but in approaching it. 

Mr. Edward Stanwood read the following paper: 

An Anticipation of the Monroe Doctrine. 

Probably no two publicists would agree upon the exact 
terms of a definition of the Monroe doctrine. They have the 
same difficulty that is experienced when one attempts to ex- 
press in phrases that will be generally accepted the powers of 
the national government under the Constitution, and the limit 
of those powers. Like the Constitution as interpreted at 
different times and by men of diverse political opinions, the 
Monroe doctrine as we know it to-day is an evolution. In its 
original form it was nothing more than the expression of an 


opinion, of a statement, of the attitude of the national mind 
toward an enterprise which was supposed to be contemplated 
by the Holy Alliance. The President told Congress and the 
world that although we had not interfered and should not 
interfere with any existing European possessions on American 
soils, this country would regard an attempt on the part of the 
powers of Europe " to extend their system to any portion of 
this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety " ; also 
that we should consider it as an unfriendly act if those powers 
were to interpose for the purpose of oppressing or otherwise 
controlling the destiny of the newly formed republics. That 
was all. There was no threat of physical opposition to either 
measure. Merely, if certain powers should perform certain 
acts we should not like it. 

But as the nation has grown in strength and in the con- 
sciousness of its power, the somewhat timid outgiving of 
Monroe has become a national rule of action, a principle which 
the country is ready to defend with the sword, if necessary. 
At the same time, although there is only a remote danger that 
any European power will attempt to extend its system to any 
portion of this hemisphere, and no danger at all that any two 
powers will combine to restore Spanish America to Spain, 
which was what Monroe had in mind when he spoke of 
oppressing them or controlling their destiny, the doctrine has 
been expanded and extended until it is now — in the view of 
the United States — a continental system. It is not inter- 
national law, as many writers undertake to prove, as though 
that were worth while, and do prove. It is, as I before re- 
marked, a rule of national action, which the government has a 
perfect right to adopt, — "without the advice or consent of 
any other nation," as our sixteen-to-one friends used to say of 
our right to re-establish bimetallism. 

The additions to the doctrine — and those additions have been 
made with quite as much authority as was behind the origi- 
nal promulgation — involve the self-imposed duty upon this 
country to resist the invasion of any of the independent 
countries of the continent by a European power with a pur- 
pose of territorial aggrandizement, and a consequent duty to 
require these countries to refrain from acts that would justify 
such invasion. 

There is another addition, which is not logically derivable 


from the original Monroe doctrine, namely, that although we 
have not interfered and shall not interfere with existing 
European possessions in this hemisphere, we shall not tolerate 
the transfer of any such possession from one such power to 
another. No case has ever arisen that called for a formal ex- 
pression of national policy on this point, but public sentiment 
has been very decided whenever such a transfer has been 
rumored, — for example, when it was suggested that although 
Denmark would not sell its West Indian possessions to the 
United States, it might dispose of them to Germany, or to 
some other European power. 

But the earliest expression of opposition to such a transfer 
certainly antedated the Monroe doctrine by more than eighteen 
years. Probably the first time that it was ever enunciated 
was in April, 1805, by Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to 
James Bowdoin, which has just seen the light in the second 
volume of Bowdoin and Temple Papers recently published by 
this Society. 

Writing on April 27, 1805, to Mr. Bowdoin, who had lately 
been appointed minister at the Court of Spain, President 
Jefferson remarks upon the unsatisfactory condition of the 
relations between the United States and Spain, and adds, 
" We want nothing of hers : & we want no other nation to 
possess what is hers." It is but one clause of the sentence, 
the rest of which relates to the manner in which Spain had 
met our advances. But it is a distinct anticipation of one 
phase of the doctrine which was not evolved from Monroe's 
principle until many years after the fear of the Holy Alliance 
had disappeared. Monroe went only so far as to say " we have 
not interfered and shall not interfere " with existing European 
possessions. His predecessor in the presidential chair thought 
the question out to the end. We not only do not want what 
is theirs ; we shall not allow other powers to take or to receive 
what is theirs. America for Americans ! 

Mr. Charles C. Smith communicated for Mr. Worthington 
C. Ford, of Washington, D. C, a Corresponding Member, 
copies of a large number of letters of James Cheetham, an 
English radical who escaped to this country in 1798, was 
editor of the " American Citizen," and died in New York in 
1810, at the age of thirty-seven. 



The position of James Cheetham as a political pamphleteer is 
too well known to require extended notice. The following 
letters, taken from the Jefferson Papers in the Library of 
Congress, describe the history of a very dull and pretentious 
volume, which still makes some figure in booksellers' cata- 
logues. For a " suppressed " work is supposed to be charged 
with matter dangerous to reputations, and the spice of the 
secret, the flavor of what cannot be spoken abroad, gives it a 
value far above its real merits. There was little to choose 
between the author of the History of the administration and 
James Cheetham. They were fair representatives of the polit- 
ical writers of the day. To show the continued relations 
existing between the President and the scribbler, I have added 
letters of a later date. 

To Thomas Jefferson. 

American Citizen Office, 

New York, June 1, 1801. 

Sir, — We take the liberty of addressing you upon a subject highly 
interesting to our Country. We are placed in an important section of 
the United States as the guardians, in some degree, of the republican 
welfare of the Country. 

As republicans faithfully attached to the Constitution and the rights 
of the people, we feel considerable responsibility attached to our efforts ; 
but while we are sensible of this, we are not less so that there are 
different grounds on which we may be placed by the measures of gov- 
ernment, which will extend or curtail the power of rendering service to 
the cause in which we are engaged. 

There are no citizens who more highly value your tallents, your 
virtues and the republican services which you have rendered your 
Country, than ourselves — there are none who are more willing at the 
present moment to bestow confidence and just applause — none whose 
affections more anxiously include the idea of a successfull issue to the 
administration which the people and the Constitution have Committed 
to your charge. 

We wish to observe, however, that the people of this City and State 
look to the new administration with full Confidence for a thorough 
Change in the different offices, so as to exclude obnoxious characters, 
those who were enimical to the revolution, or have since become hostile 
to the Constitution and to the principles and progress of republican 
government. We wish respectfully to express to you our firm opinion 
that a measure of this sort is absolutely necessary to preserve that 


republican majority in this State which has contributed so essentially 
towards placing you in that elevated situation which you now hold, 
and which has diffused universal Joy among the friends of liberty in 
every part of the Union. We have reason to be assured that Changes 
of a similar nature would be extremely useful in the Eastern States, 
whatever may be the Situation of the Southern part of the Country in 
this respect. 

Republican exertions will certainly be relaxed in this quarter if un- 
happily the people ever be convinced that all their efforts to Change 
the Chief Magistrate, have produced no consequent effects in reuovat- 
ing the subordinate Stations of our government; — those changes are 
equally necessary to the preservation of that public Spirit which has 
Caused the Country once more to return to republican measures and 
republican men. 

If our anxiety upon this subject should ultimately appear premature 
the moment of its discovery would be a moment of satisfaction and 
pleasure to ourselves and our Citizens ; But we have reason to appre- 
hend from the Sources of information we possess, that the idea of a 
thorough change is not at present contemplated by the executive. In 
this business, however, Sir, we speak not from Considerations of per- 
sonal expectation — our first wish is the preservation of liberty and our 
Country, and in no shape whatever is this letter dictated by views in- 
cluding appointments to any office in the power of the Executive to 

We have spoken with the freedom which we believe best Comports 
with our duty and which we also believe fully accords with your views 
Concerning the rights of free Citizens, which the labours of your life 
have so eminently Contributed to establish. 

Our Solicitude for the preservation of the Constitution, which we 
conceive happily Confided to your Care, for the welfare and Celebrity 
of your administration, to which we will zealously Contribute our sup- 
port, and for the Continuation of that affection which our republican 
Citizens have long, and we think justly placed in you, must be our 
apology for this letter. 

We are with sentiments of respect your friends, 

Denniston & Cheetham. 

New York, June 12 th 1801. 

Sir, — We have received with much pleasure your obliging favour 
of the 6th. Inst., and feel ourselves no less indebted for the Candid and 
very friendly manner in which you have been pleased to address us 
than for the disclosure of your views. To preserve public liberty and 
unite the great body of American Citizens into one mass is no less salu- 
tary than just. And permit us to add that the eminent Services you 


have rendered our Country and the just Sentiments you have never 
ceased to advocate evince that your conduct through a long and valu- 
able life has been regulated by these equitable principles. 

While we reiterate a renounciation of personal views, in obedience to 
your solicitation and our duty we request your attention to two public 
officers in this City, who in our estimation, are peculiarly obnoxious to 
our Citizens. 

When Tyranny is exercised by any, but particularly by those who 
were opposed to our revolution, the real friends of liberty, those who 
fought and suffered in our memorable Conflict for Independence, behold 
it with mortification and regret. 

Mr. Rogers, 1 the naval officer in our Custom-house, was employed 
during our revolution in the British Court of admiralty in this City. 
Of this we will transmit to you, if required, satisfactory testimony. We 
know that men are frequently Converted from wrong to right Senti- 
ments on all Subjects ; but the opinions of Mr. Rogers are the same 
now they were when in the Service of the British King. Mr. Sands 2 
Collector of Customs co-operates with Mr. Rogers in all his views, and 
his sentiments and conduct are no less objectionable to our Citizens 
than destructive of our liberty. He threatened to dismiss one of his 
Clerks immediately after the important election of 1800, for voting for, 
and advocating the Cause of Republicanism ; and we know that nothing 
but the astonishing and instantaneous effect produced by that election 
prevented it. Their Stations confer an immense influence, which in 
their hands is extremely injurious to the Constitution. 

We mention those men in particular since their removal from office 
is ardently desired by our Citizens, and would, we are convinced, effect- 
ually crush any opposition here, which might otherwise arise on this. 
Subject, and of which a Certain Party here would avail themselves. to 
further their own views of aggrandizement, and render your adminis- 
tration, if possible, unpopular. 

We have no particular men in view whom we wish to be appointed 
to the two offices, our desire, with that of our fellow Citizens, only 
is that they be filled with Republicans. 

We see with regret the Difficulty under which the executive must 
labour for want of Correct information of the various characters in the 
Union solicitous for office. This may sometimes lead you into involun- 
tary error. It will ever be the lot of men elevated to that high and 
responsible Station. But we rejoice that we have an executive anxious 
to lessen this unavoidable evil by a desire of receiving information from 

1 Richard Rogers, appointed by Washington in February, 1797, vice Ben 
Walker, resigned. 

2 Joshua Sands, appointed by John Adams in May, 1797, vice John Lamb, 


the meanest Citizen in the States on Subjects in which its welfare i3 

Be assured, Sir, that our exertions shall not be wanting to procure 
and to Communicate dispassionately all the information which we may 
deem to be of the smallest utility. 

Accept the tender of our Services and respect, 

Denniston & Cheetham. 

New York October 22«d 1801. 

Sir, — Much noise has been made Concerning the report of your 
having ordered M r Dallas to enter a Nolle Prosequi in the suit against 
M r Duane commenced by your predecessor on the behalf of the Senate 
of the United States. An inflamatory essay which appeared in the 
Gazette of the United States, on the unconstitutionality of the act, under 
the Signature of Juris Consultus has been republished in most of our 
federal prints, and has excited a little disquietude even in the minds of 
some republicans not well acquainted with the nature of such a proceed- 
ing. No defence of it has yet been made in our Republican prints, and 
our Silence has been Construed by many really honest men into an 
acknowledgment that the act is neither Constitutional nor precedented. 
In both these points of view, after a full examination of the Subject, 
we are wholly satisfied, that if a Nolle Prosequi was ordered by you to 
be entered, it is neither unprecedented nor in our opinion unconstitu- 
tional. We are Determined, however, to defend your measures while 
they appear to us, as they have hitherto done, not only Constitutional 
and just, but highly Commendable. We value the principle which 
raised you to the Chief Magistracy of the Union, and on which you act, 
too highly not to exert ourselves in the Defence of measures Compatible 
with it. We are solicitous to write a few essays on the Subject here 
adverted to. But we are wanting in information respecting it. We 
wish to be informed whether the Nolle Prosequi was ordered to be 
entered in the Case mentioned, and if so on what ground? We are 
aware of the Delicacy of asking this information from you. But we 
are persuaded that it Cannot come from a purer and more enlightened 
Source. Should you think the request not incompatible with your 
high political Station, the earlier you impart to us the information, the 
more acceptable it will be. At all events we shall defend the act, but 
our Defence will not be so Complete without the Information as 
with it. 

We beg pardon for troubling you with so long a letter. 
We are sincerely your devouted friends, 

Denniston & Cheetham. 


[[Washington, Dec. 10, 1801. ] 
To the President : 

I Called on Mr. Madison yesterday but he was too indisposed to be 
seen. I shall Return to New York by the Mail in the morning. And 
lest I should not have an opertunity of seeing Mr. Madison During my 
stay, I have Committed to writing what I had to say to him Concern- 
ing the Subject on which I had the honor of speaking with you the 
other night. 

If you have taken a copy of the note written by Mr. Clinton I shall 
be much obliged to you for the original when Convenient. I board at 
Mr. Stille's. But if not Convenient while I stay you will be pleased 
to transmit it to me at New York. 

[No signature.] 1 

Some account of the plans and views of aggrandizement of a faction 
in the City of New York, Respectfully Submitted to the Consideration 
of the President of the United States. 

I became personally acquainted with Mr. Burr at the Election of the 
City and County of New York, for members of the State Legislature, in 
April, 1800. The part I took in that Election, attracted the attention 
of Mr. Burr, whose well laid plans Did not a little Contribute to its 
success. This acquaintance, thus formed, Continued to increase, untill 
my attachment, as I supposed, to the Constitution of the Common- 
wealth, and my exertions in Conjunction with those of my fellow Citi- 
zens to bring about the present change in our affairs, obtained for me 
much of the Confidence, and, I have reason to believe, of the esteem of 
Mr. Burr. Few events occurred in the union, from our State Election 
in 1800, until some months after the 4th March, 1801, however secret, 
with which I was not made acquainted by Mr. Burr. During this time, 
though I was not Ignorant of the Suspicions entertained of Mr. Burr's 
views by many of our best informed and most honest Citizens, I per- 
ceived nothing in the general tenor of his Conduct that manifested 
intentions incompatible with the liberty of the Country, or the wishes 
of its Citizens. The first event which gave me occasion to question the 
Justice of Mr. Burr's views was the Presidential Election. In the 
general Conduct of Mr. Burr in that Election, I saw much to regret. 
It is not necessary to say a word Respecting the wishes of the people 
on the Choice of the Chief-magistrate — they were too evident to be 
misunderstood by the sound and faithful politician. But the intention 
of Mr. Burr to set aside those wishes, by raising himself to an eminence 
to which he was not Destined by the voice of the Union was too pal- 
pably manifested to me — not by words, but by actions less ambiguous 

1 The date is endorsed by Jefferson. 


— to admit of a Doubt. If it be asked upon what foundation these 
bold assertions are made? I answer, upon interviews which I had with 
Mr. Burr every Day During that pending and important Crisis, together 
with a Combination of Circumstances which left no Doubt in my mind 
of his intentions. 

In the State of New York the appointment of Mr. Lispenard to the 
important function of Elector was, there can be no Doubt, a result of 
the exclusive arrangement of Mr. Burr. Mr. Lispenard is a Citizen of 
much influence in the Sixth Ward, the most Republican one in the 
City and County of New York. He is a Republican ; and his attach- 
ment to the Cause cannot, perhaps, otherwise be doubted, than as he is 
Connected with, and wholly Devoted to, the views of Mr. Burr, which 
I with many other persons, think hostile to it. This entire Devotion, 
from the very warm friendship which mutually subsisted at the time 
between Mr. Lispenard and Mr. Burr, could not have been unknown 
to the latter. And Mr. Burr's being a member of the Legislature at 
the time the Electors were chosen, secured, there is every reason to 
believe, the appointment of Mr. Lispenard to accomplish personal and 
of course private views. 

Much mischief was apprehended by a few of our well meaning and 
Discerning Citizens from the blind attachment of Mr. Lispenard to 
Mr. Burr. Among this class of Citizens, Mr. De Witt Clinton stood in 
the foremost rank. This Citizen, suspecting some foul play, took the 
liberty to question Mr. Lispenard, previous to the meeting of the 
Electors, Respecting the persons for whom he himself was elected to 
vote. Mr. Clinton hinted at a report which prevailed in the best in- 
formed political circles, that some of the electors meant to Drop Mr. 
Jefferson : but that all of them intended to vote for Mr. Burr. This 
was in the presence of many of the electors who were Dining, if I 
mistake not, at Mr. Edward Livingston's. They all, however, promptly 
Declared their determination to vote for the two Candidates, except 
Mr. Lispenard who remained silent ! This Statement was related to 
me by Mr. De Witt Clinton, and there can be no Doubt of its being 

This silence, however, was of use. Justly apprehending mischievous 
effects from the Connection between Mr. Lispenard and Mr. Burr ; 
and anticipating, from the undue attachment of the former to the latter, 
a Contravention of the wishes of the Country in the election of the 
President, Mr. De Witt Clinton attended the meeting of the electors ; 
but previously suggested to Dr. Ledyard, one of the electors, a friend 
of Mr. Clinton and of liberty, to propose to the electors to shew to each 
other their ballots anterior to their being Deposited in the ballot Box. 
This was accordingly proposed and readily assented to by every one of 
the electors but Mr. Lispenard, who hesitated. But finding his Col- 


leagues so unanimous and pertinacious in their Determination, he at 
length agreed to the proposition. 

During the Contest in the house of Representatives, Mr. Lispenard, 
however, asserted, that if he had known the two Candidates would have 
had an equal number of votes he would have Dropped Mr. Jefferson. 

In this manner Mr. Burr's views were Defeated in the State of New 

Afterwards Mr. Burr went himself to Rhode-Island to electioneer, as 
was generally supposed, in behalf of himself. On his Return he De- 
spatched Col. [Marinus] Willet to Rhode-Island to complete what he 
had begun. This Gentleman is a partizan of Mr. Burr. With the 
result of both those expeditions the President is Doubtless acquainted. 

At the Seat of Government of S. Carolina Mr. Burr had a secret 
agency, Mr. Timothy Greene, now an Attorney in New York. For 
several weeks, Mr. Greene wrote to Mr. Burr by every Post untill the 
Carolina votes were given. Mr. Greene's letters were Directed to 
Mr. John Swartwout, a strong partisan, and a Confidential friend 
of Mr. Burr, to avoid Suspicion, and were by him Conveyed to Mr. 
Burr. Mr. Burr often mentioned to me the letters he received from 
Mr. Greene, but never permitted me to see their Contents. 

It is not necessary for me to Depict the Conduct of Mr. Burr from 
the giving of the electoral votes in S. Carolina untill the happy termina- 
tion of the Contest in the house of Representatives. The President 
cannot be unacquainted with it. 

In May last I entered into partnership with Mr. David Denniston, 
who was before that time the sole proprietor of the American Citizen. 
Mr. Denniston is nearly related by blood to Governor Clinton. This 
paper Mr. Burr wished to suppress. What his real motives were for 
wishing to suppress it, we are left to conjecture, but his avowed, one 
was its lak [sz'c] of ability. Mr. Burr heard that I was about to enter 
into partnership with Mr. Denniston, and to take upon myself the 
Editorship of the paper. He accordingly sent for me, advised me to 
commence a new paper myself, and to have nothing to do with Mr. 
Denniston ; assuring me that Mr. Denniston's might be easily suppressed, 
and offering to obtain for me one thousand Subscribers. He added that 
now (meaning that now he was Vice-President of the United States) 
he wished to have a paper under his partronage. The offer was De- 
clined, and I entered into partnership with Mr. Denniston. 

Still, however, our intimacy Continued ; Mr. Denniston and myself 
concluding that it might be well to develop the plans of Mr. Burr, that 
we might be prepared for every Contingency that might arise. Nor did 
Mr. Burr long conceal what he thought prudent to unfold, and he un- 
folded sufficient to Demonstrate his views. Early in May he began to 
express his Dislike of the administration. He said that much was 


expected from the administration of Mr. Jefferson, but little had been 
Done. No Removals had been made but such as he had pointed out 
and almost Demanded. And that had it not been for his importuning 
the President untill he was himself both tired and Disgusted not a single 
Removal would have been made in the State of New York. This lan- 
guage was propagated with great freedom in the City by his runners, 
Mr. Matthew L. Davis, and David Gelston, now Collector of the Port. 
The office conferred upon Mr. Gelston has, however, silenced him. 
The usual intimacy and correspondence, nevertheless, is still kept up 
between Mr. Burr and himself, and he is as much devoted to him as 
ever. But he is now, externally, mute. It is not so, however, with 
Mr. Davis. He is exceedingly clamorous and loquacious. And he is so 
very intimate with Mr. Burr, and so well known to be at his Command ; 
and withal, so perfectly Destitute of an independent mind, that, what- 
ever sentiments he utters against the present administration, and he ex- 
presses many, they are generally suspected of coming originally from 
Mr. Burr, and I believe very justly. Mr. Swartwout, Mr. William P- 
Van Ness, and Mr. Timothy Greene, of New York, are also agents of 
Mr. Burr, and entirely Devoted to him. Indeed Mr. Swartwout and 
Mr. Gelston are given to understand by Mr. Burr, and I know them to 
be of opinion, that they owe their offices to him. 

These sentiments of Dislike of the present administration, Mr. Burr 
expressed in copious Streams to every person who visited him, and with 
whom he could converse with any Degree of Confidence ; but to none, 
perhaps, more than to myself. For, as I have before observed, I was 
desirous of fathoming the intriguing and inexplicable man as far as I 
could without Dishonoring myself by a palpable expectation of entering 
into his views, or of being guilty of Dereliction of my own sentiments. 
He was Sollicitous, not indeed in Definite words, but in a manner suffi- 
ciently clear to be understood, for us to commence an open but mild 
opposition to the administration. But this we did not nor will not do, 
unless, indeed, we should find in the acts of the administration, an une- 
quivocal and systematic Design, as in the one which preceded the present, 
to violate the Constitution, which is by no means expected in the acts 
of him who now fills the Presidential Chair. But when Mr. Barnes x 
was appointed District Judge of Rhode Island, Mr. Burr was outrageous. 
In a Conversation which I had with him on the subject of the appointment, 
he laid hold, in great warmth, of two letters which lay upon his table, 
and said that one was from Governor Fenner of Rhode Island, and the 
other from one of the most influential Characters in that State, in both 
of which great indignation, he said, was expressed at the appointment, 
and that the writers added, that such was the Dissatisfaction of the Citi- 
zens of that State on account of the appointment, as well as the general 

1 David Leonard Barnes, nominated January Q, 1802. 


tenor of the President's Conduct, that were he to be elected at the mo- 
ment he would not have a single vote in the State. Mr. Burr added 
that he wondered that the Republican papers Did not notice these things. 
He enquired whether any thing was said in them on the Subject. And 
among others he mentioned the Albany Register, the Aurora, the Boston 
Chronicle, the Richmond Examiner and the Baltimore American. 1 

Immediately after the appointment of Mr. Barnes, Mr. Linn 2 was 
appointed to the office of Superviser for the District of New Jersey. 
This appointment was loudly and openly reprobated by Mr. Davis and 
the rest of the faction, but particularly by those whose names were 
above mentioned. They said it was in vain any longer to conceal the 
facts concerning this appointment and a few others connected with it. 
They stated that the election of Mr. Jefferson was the result of a Com- 
promise, which they said was of the following nature. That Mr. Linn 
was known in Congress to be a trimmer. That on the vote for the 
appropriation to carry into effect the British Treaty, Mr. Theodorus 
Bailey of New York abandoned the Republicans. That consequently 
no reliance could be placed on the promise of those two Gentlemen to 
give their votes for Mr. Jefferson. It was therefore expected by the 
Republicans that after voting three or fom* times in the house, they would 
become alarmed, join the federalists, and vote for Mr. Burr. Mr. 
Edward Livingston, they still say, was also suspected, but from what 
cause I know not, as he has always signalized himself as an inflexible 
Republican. To prevent these three Gentlemen's voting with the 
Federalists, and there by Defeating the election of Mr. Jefferson, they 
have liberally Disseminated the story that the confidential friends of 
Mr. Jefferson informed them, in a caucus that was held for the purpose, 
that if they would continue to vote for Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Linn should 
be appointed to the office he now holds, that Mr. Livingston should be 
made District Attorney of New York, and that Mr. Bailey should be 
appointed Naval officer in the Custom-house of New York. The ap- 
pointment of the two former is a Confirmation, they say, of the Com- 
promise which, they boldly assert took place. Mr. Bailey has not been 
appointed according to promise, they add, because Mr. Davis was so 
powerfully recommended by Mr. Burr and his friends for the same 
office, and Mr. Jefferson was thrown into such a Dilemma thereby, 
that, rather than arouse the indignation of Mr. Burr and his friends by 
the appointment of Mr. Bailey, he chose to keep Mr. Rogers 3 in office ; 

1 These papers were under the following management: The Albany Register^ 
of John Barber ; the Philadelphia Aurora, of William Duane ; the Boston Chron- 
icle, of Adams and Rhoades ; the Richmond Enquirer, of Thomas Ritchie, and 
the Baltimore American, of Alexander Martin. 

2 James Lynn, nominated January 6, 1802, vice A. Dunham, removed. 

8 Richard Rogers, nominated by President Washington, February 17, 1797. 


and has thus been guilty of a breach of faith toward Mr. Bailey. That 
this story came originally from Mr. Burr to these persons I am convinced. 
Since, independent of what these unprincipled men say even in the 
public streets on this subject, Mr. Burr mentioned it to me as a fact in 
the early part of last August, from which time I have not spoken with 
him on any subject. 

Thus far I have spoken of the means employed by Mr. Burr and his 
panders. The end is obvious. It is to bring the present administration 
into disrepute, and thereby to place Mr. Burr in the Presidential Chair 
— a thing Devoutly to be Deprecated. 

This little faction, which appears to be rapidly increasing in the city 
of New York, becomes more and more alarming, and more and more 
audacious every Day. It is, however, happily Confined to the City of 
New York, with very few exceptions. Such as those pointed out in 
the note of Mr. De Witt Clinton. The means of averting the menaced 
storm are in the hands of the federal Legislature, and with which the 
executive is well acquainted. 

My duty to freedom and the Constitution has induced me to pen this 
brief statement and to submit it to your Excellency's Consideration. 
Extraordinary enterprises, whose known objects are Dishonorable and 
unjust, call for Commensurate means of counteraction. And I am 
sensible that nothing but the nature of the case could warrant my 
penning the Contents of this paper. If it should happen, however, to 
be of service to the general cause, I have my reward. 

You are at liberty to make such use of this paper as in your wisdom 
you may Deem meet. 

Accept my sincere friendship. 

James Cheetham. 
Washington, December 10, 1801. 

New York, Dec r 29th, 1801. 
Sir, — The history of the administration of John Adams, late Presi- 
dent of the United States, written by John Wood, of this city, will, in 
all probability, be suppressed. It was printed and ready for sale when 
I returned from Washington. The persons engaged in its suppression 
are those whose plans I in some Degree unfolded to you During my stay 
in Washington. Their motives for suppressing it are not yet completely 
Developed ; but they are sufficiently understood to convince us that they 
are not the most honorable. The work is Republican ; and why Re- 
publicans should be solicitous to suppress it, is enigmatical. One of the 
avowed reasons is that it contains remarks Calculated to offend many of 
the federalists, from which and many other Circumstances it is inferred 
that to form a Coalition with them at a suitable time is in Contemplation. 
It will be finally Determined this night whether the work will be sup- 


pressed or not. The publishers (in whose hands the work is, and who 
employed Mr. Wood to write it) have acceded to the proposition of the 
faction to give $1100 for its suppression. If the money be paid to- 
night according to promise, it will be Consigned to the flames, and 
Mr, Wood is to write another under the influence, it is supposed, of 
Mr. Burr. 

My friends think it would be Desirable to anticipate the intended new 
copy, by an impartial History of the administration of Mr. Adams, and 
by so Doing Defeat the views of the suppressors of the present one. 
But there are several Documents necessary to Connect events which can- 
not be had but from the Department of State. There is, perhaps, an in- 
timate Connection between the prominent measures of the latter part of 
the administration of General Washington and those of Mr. Adams. 
Perhaps General Washington began the System upon which Mr. Adams 
acted and which he matured. It might, in writing the History of the 
administration of Mr. Adams, be necessary, in order to " speak of things 
as they were," and to trace effects to their Causes, to go back to the ap- 
pointment of John Jay to negotiate the British Treaty, and to the 
subsequent and perhaps Consequent Denunciation of the self- Created 
Societies by General Washington. For this purpose, and in order to 
" command a view of the whole ground," the Secret instructions of Mr. 
Jay would be necessary. These are solicited ; and if you should not 
think it incompatible to give them, they will be received with much 

It would also be Desirable to know whether Mr. Jay received Com- 
pensation both as Chief Justice and Envoy During the negotiation ? It 
is supposed that he received pay as Chief Justice only, but I do not 
remember that this has been accurately ascertained. 

An answer to this as early as may be Convenient will be very- 

I am most sincerely your friend, 

James Cheetham. 

New York, January 30 th , 26 th year of American Indep. [1802]. 

Sir, — Your favour is received : but on account of making the use of 
it which you required, and which you will perhaps recollect, we are not 
able to mention the date. We are sorry to give you so much trouble ; 
we are in some degree sensible of the arduousness of the high function 
you fill and of the multiplicity of business you have to attend to. And yet 
it may be necessary for us sometimes to Commune with you. We shall 
always feel a high satisfaction in receiving answers from you to our 
Communications ; but whenever you shall find it convenient we will 
readily and Cheerfully dispense with them. 

We propose to give you a true and Corect narative of the suppression 


of Wood's History of the Administration of Mr. John Adams. It shall 
be as Concise as possible. Perhaps it may not be without its use, to 
impart to you, previously, some information of Wood himself. 

Wood is by birth a Scotchman. It appears from Credible informa- 
tion, as well as from the title page of his " history of Switzerland," 
which was published at Edinburgh, that he was " Master of the Acad- 
emy established at Edinburgh by the honorable the board of trustees for 
the improvement of Arts in Scotland." He is a Good Mathematician, an 
ellegant drawer, and a Complete master of the Greek, latin, and french 
languages. But he has no fixed principles in politics and in every re- 
spect he is a man of Great indecision and versatility. He was one of 
of the Edinburgh reviewers ; but he can write with as much pleasure 
and with as great facility in defence of monarchy as in that of Rep- 
resentative government like our own. His history of Switzerland 
(which from the scarcity of the work here you have probably not seen) 
abounds with Sentiments as monarchical and despotic as any contained 
in Burke's letters on the French revolution, or any other Anti- 
republican production. It was written in 1799. He has been in 
America abont eighteen months. By profession he is a republican : in 
action anything. We Confine this word, however, to his political acts; 
we know nothing of his private dealings that is Dishonorable to him. 
He was originally introduced to Mr. Burr as a teacher of languages and 
the Mathematics. He taught his daughter the greek and latin languages, 
and we believe something of Drawing. Since then M r Burr has been 
his friend. This friendship was no doubt Commenced on honorable 
Grounds. What will be its termination we will not pretend to predict. 

Mr. Wood was lured to write the history of the administration. He 
Contracted with Messrs. Barlas & Ward, Bookseller in this City to 
write an octavo volume of 500 pages for 200 Dollars. The work was 
written according to agreement, printed by Messrs. Barlas & Ward and 
according to Contract became their exclusive property. When the 
volume was ready for publication an overture was made by Mr. Wood 
to Messrs. Barlas & Ward to purchase the whole edition for the pur- 
pose of entire Suppression. The basis of the negotiation was an offer 
to refund the net expences only of the edition. The poverty of Mr. 
W T ood was however known to Messrs. Barlas & Ward, and of Course 
they refused to enter into a pecuniary agreement with him, the fullfill- 
ment of which were to rest on him alone. Mr. Wood was therefore 
under the necessity of unfolding the name of his employer and to gratify 
whom the proposition for suppression was made. Mr. Burr authorized 
Mr. Wood to say in writing, if required, that he would be responsible 
for the fulfilment of any agreement which Mr. Wood might enter into 
for the Suppression of the work. This was accordingly done by a 
letter written by Mr. Wood, which we have seen by permission of Mr. 


Barlas. Various letters were exchanged Concerning the price of Sup- 
pression. 2000 Dollars were demanded by Messrs. Barlas & Ward ; 
1100 were ultimately agreed upon; and Mr. Wood specially author- 
ized by Mr. Burr consented to give it. In this transaction Wood was 
Considered as the representative of Mr. Burr. 

Secrecy was enjoined upon Messrs. Barlas & Ward. It was stated 
at the Commencement of the negociation that the proposition for Sup- 
pressing the work was not to be made known unless Mr. Burr should 
eventually recede from a mutual and final agreement. 

It was found difficult however to procure the 1100 Dollars which 
was agreed upon to be paid for the Suppression of the Edition. A 
Second overture was therefore made, to wit, that the sum should be 
paid partly in specie and partly in promisory notes with good indorsers. 
This was accepted, and a day appointed for a final Settlement. When 
the day arrived, however, even this mode of payment was found incon- 
venient. Procrastination ensued, and Messrs. Barlas & Ward became 
alarmed. Thus situated Mr. Barlas applied to several persons for 
advice, and amongst others, to ourselves. At first be spoke of the sub- 
ject with a degree of reserve incompatible with the objects of his enquiry. 
After two or three interviews, however, he opened his mind frankly 
and disclosed the whole scene. He related what we have here stated — ■ 
and what we shall hereafter State. He was advised to obtain the 
stipulated sum if possible ; but if in the end he should find it impossible 
then to publish the work, as the only man left to indemnify himself 
for the expence of printing the edition. This was advised in contra- 
distinction to a proposition of his own, namely to sue Mr. Burr for the 
sum agreed upon. This we thought the best plan he Could pursue to 
secure the expence he had incurred in printing the edition. For owing 
to the Garrulity of Mr. Wood and several other Circumstances, the 
Suppression had become a matter of such notoriety as to form a Subject 
of Tavern Conversation. Of course it was Considered, and very justly 
too, by Mr. Barlas, that the Sale of the work was already materially 
injured. Wood was willing to declare on Oath that he was the Agent 
for Mr. Burr and that he ratified the agreement made by Wood with 
Barlas & Ward. Many hindrances, however, were found in the way 
of prosecution, and eventually Mr. Barlas Consented to wave it. In 
this suspence Barlas & Ward were kept six weeks, during which time 
the matter became more known to the public. At length Mr. Barlas 
applied to Mr. William Van Ness on the Subject, who has acted as a 
sort of private Secretary to Mr. Burr during the negociation. He 
requested Mr. Van Ness to write to Mr. Burr, who was then at Phila- 
delphia on his way to Washington, to know positively whether he in- 
tended to pay the money or not. Accordingly a letter was written by 
him and an answer received which simply stated that " if Mr. Barlas 


looked to him for the money, he might look." This was accepted as a 
categorical refusal to fulfil the agreement. This answer delivered to 
them by Mr. Van Ness confounded Barlas & Ward. They became 
irresolute as Mr. Burr became imperious in refusing to Comply with 
the terms of the Contract. They at length half decided to prosecute 
him for the recovery of the 1100 Dollars. Accordingly accompanied 
by Mr. Wood they applied to Mr. Wortman,* Counsellor at Law for 
advice. Mr. Wood made a declaration in writing of his agency to 
accomplish the Suppression of the edition. This we have read. The 
purport of the Declaration is briefly this. That he was the agent of 
and employed by Mr. Burr to negociate with Mr. Barlas and Mr. 
Ward Concerning the Suppression of the History. That it was agreed 
to be Suppressed for 1100 Dollars according to instructions which he 
had received from Mr. Burr, and that Mr. Burr Consented to pay the 
money according to agreement. This declaration which is now in the 
hands of Mr. Wortman was not attested by Mr. Wood, but he expli- 
citly Declared that if called as an evidence into a Court of Justice he 
would there attest it. 

They, nevertheless, at length determined again to make application 
to Mr. Burr by letter before they had recourse to law. Accordingly 
Mr. Barlas wrote himself to Mr. Burr at Washington about a fortnight 
ago. He stated in his letter that if Mr. Burr would not comply with 
the agreement by paying the money within a given day he would publish 
the History and expose, in an appendix to it, the whole negotiation. 
He was of opinion that rather than Mr. Burr would suffer the part he 
had acted in the Scheme of Suppression to be exposed to the public, he 
would Instantly pay the money. No answer has been received to this 
letter. Nor Can we tell whether any will be. Such has been the ne- 
gotiation, and such the train in which it now stands. 

You may be solicitous to know something of the Contents of this 
History which has been accompanied with so many singular incidents. 
We have been favoured by Mr. Barlas with the reading of it. We 
will give you as accurate a description of its Contents as memory will 
permit; it must however be very summary. 

It Consists of 508 pages divided in 15 Chapters. The first treats of 
the Causes of the election of Mr. Adams and of the political Sentiments 
advanced in his defence, as he sportingly terms it, of the American 
Constitutions. Mr. Wood occupies about half a page in delineating the 
Cause of his election. Respecting the sentiments Contained in his defence 
he says that they are those of Hume and Robertson on the Feudal sys- 

* Mr. Wortman is the author of the pamphlet we sent you a few days ago, 
signed "Lysander," of an octavo volume entitled " A treatise concerning political 
enquiry and the liberty of the press," and of several other tracts. He is personally 
acquainted with Mr. Gallatin and with the transactions here stated. 


terns, and therefore by Confuting those two historians, on whose Senti- 
ments those of Mr. Adams are founded, he shall confute him also. In 
his observations on this part he exhibits great want of reading as well 
as of intellect. His observations are exceedingly loose and puerile, and 
such as a man well read, and possessed of Claims to sound argumentation 
would really be ashamed of. He has at least sixty pages of extracts 
from Callender's History of the United States, his Prospect before us 
&c. &C. 1 relative to Captures and adjudications of vessels. He has also 
many pages from the same author, giving descriptions of various politi- 
cal Characters in the Union. The whole sixteen letters of Mr. Jonathan 
Dayton to Mr. Childs Concerning land Speculations together with a bill 
in Chancery filed in this City by Childs against Dayton. These occupy 
about 30 pages. He treats of Logan's embassy to France, and inserts 
all the news paper publications that appeared on that Subject. The 
whole of the Speeches of Mr. Adams delivered while he was President- 
These occupy at least 40 pages of the History. He has also a few 
Childish Comments upon them — Your Speech to the Senate on your 
inauguration as Vice President. The letter of all the acts passed dur- 
ing Mr. Adams's administration. Biography of Mr. Adams taken from 
Morse's Geography. Biography of yourself taken principally from an 
European work Intitled " Public Characters," and from a pamphlet 
which appeared in Vindication of your Character before your election. 
Extracts from those two works take up about 18 or 20 pages. A short 
Character of Charles C. Pinckney of his own. A Biography of Mr. 
Burr taken principally from himself and from Governor Livingston's 
Character of his father, which Mr. Wood says is exactly applicable to 
that of his son ! Character of Hamilton, a view of his writings in and 
out of office. An account of our negociation with the Barbary powers, 
consisting of all the official documents published on that subject, to- 
gether with about half a page of his own. A Confused and indistinct 
account of ministration of Mr. Monroe at Paris, with a long narrative 
of an essay made by Mr. Adams while president to Convert tin into Sil- 
ver ! Character of Pickering taken from Newspapers. In short it is a 
mere Compilation totally uninteresting, and Cannot possibly be of any 
service to our Cause. It is Composed as a man would Compose a 
Work merely for pay : mindful only of the bulk, but regardless of the 
Contents of the volume. It is however in tone Decidedly republican 
and exceedingly severe on the federal members of Congress from 
new England as well as other conspicuous Federalists throughout the 

Such then being the Character of the Work, it may probably be asked, 
what were the motives of Mr. Burr for attempting to purchase its Sup- 

1 For James Thomson Callender see my pamphlet containing his letters to 
Jefferson, printed in 1897. 


pression ? Here the business is wrapped in profound Mystery, and we 
are left entirely to Conjecture. It has been Intimated by Mr. Wood 
and supposed by Mr. Barlas, that Mr. Burr intends by degrees to form 
a Coalition with the federalists and feels a Correspondent desire to Crush 
publications that reflect upon the heads of that party. This, however, 
is Certain that many of those persons whom Mr. Cheetham described to 
you iu the paper which he wrote at Washington have been most Cor- 
dially engaged in the attempt to suppress the History. It is generally 
supposed here, but particularly by those who are acquainted with interior 
measures, and the General views of the party in this City, that he intends 
to avail himself of the anticipated and perhaps proffered aid of the fed- 
eralists to elevate him at the next election to the presidential Chair. If 
this be not his Sole object in essaying to Suppress the history, we Confess 
our ignorance of it. 

It is impossible to obtain a Copy of the history, except for a few hours, 
and even this by Special favour. The whole edition is in the hands of 
Messrs. Barlas & Ward. Could we Get one for a fortnight, it should 
be obtained and sent to you with great pleasure : but this is impracti- 
cable. Whether the History will yet be published or not, we know not. 
At any rate we have relinquished the Idea of Writing one ourselves. 
Mr. Wortman Intends to Write the History of the Union, to Commence 
where Dr. Ramsay Concluded his history of the revolution, and to Con- 
tinue it to the end of your Administration. That will embrace every 
thing that we had in view, and will supercede the necessity of neglect- 
ing our paper to write the history of the Administration of Mr. Adams. 

One thing, however, is indispensibly prerequisite to the Composition] 
of the work contemplated by Mr. Wortman, or of any other Political 
History of the Union, and of which we beg leave to say to you a few 

You will remember that Dr. Ramsay in his preface to his history of 
the Revolution States that he was four years in Collecting materials for 
it, notwithstanding he had access to the Official documents contained in 
the Department of State. It is a serious misfortune to the country that 
the State papers of the General Government have never been published 
in regular volumes. These form the basis of the History of the United 
States. Of their Importance in this and other respects it would be 
superfluous for us to say any thing to you. You are fully sensible of 
their Value. Nor are you less sensible that such of them as have ap- 
peared before the public,, have been published in such a manner as to 
render it almost impossible for any man to Collect them. But if it were 
possible to Collect them few of the State papers have been published 
even in newspapers. In Consequence of repeated applications that have 
been made to us on this Subject, we have it in Contemplation to com- 
mence the [Publication ? ] of the State papers beginning with the first 



Congress in 1774 and to Continue them until the termination of your ad- 
ministration. To this end we have already issued proposals, stating 
that as soon as 600 Subscribers shall have been obtained, one octavo 
volume Consisting of 500 pages shall be delivered to Subscribers every 
three months at two Dollars in Boards. It is our Intention to publish a 
regular and uninterrupted Chain of the State papers. Many of them 
we can obtain from a variety of publications. Others we presume can 
be had only from the Department of State. For this purpose we beg 
you to Grant us access to such public documents as you may think 
proper for publication. Should you be so kind as to comply with this 
request, which may tend to the mutual benefit of the country and our- 
selves, either of us will visit Washington for the purpose of transcribing 
them in such a manner as you may be pleased to prescribe. 

To this part of our letter we shall feel ourselves extremely obliged 
by an answer as soon as may be Convenient. 

We are with the greatest respect and sincerity, your fellow citizens 

Denniston & Cheetham. 

Washington April 23, 1802. 

Sir, — I shall be glad hereafter to receive your daily paper by post, 
as usual, and instead of sending on the Republican Watch-tower, you 
will retain it, and at the end of the year send it to me in a volume bound 
in blue boards, it is proper I should know what our opponents say and 
do ; yet really make a matter of conscience of not contributing to the 
support of their papers. I presume Coleman sends you his paper, as I 
understand the printers generally do to one another. I shall be very 
glad to pay you for it, and thus make my contribution go to the support 
of yours instead of his press, if therefore, after using it for your own 
purposes you will put it under cover with your American Citizen to me, 
it shall be paid for always with yours. I shall not frank this to avoid 
post office curiosity, but pray you to add the postage to your bill, which 
I have desired Mr. John Barnes of Georgetown, who is my agent in 
money matters, to have paid by his correspondent in New York. I 
believe it is Mr. Ludlow, but am not certain, but whoever it is he will 
be desired to call on you. Accept my salutations and best wishes. 

Th : Jefferson. 

New York, 30th May, 1803. 

Sir, — Agreeably to your request I have kept for you and have now 
bound in blue boards a file of the Watch Tower for the year ending in 
May, 1803 : will you be so obliging as to inform me by what Convey- 
ance you wish it to be transmitted ? 

We are blest, sir, with unusual degree of tranquillity ; little of party 
Spirit is to be seen in this City, except among those who on account of 


a certain Controversy will neither wholly withdraw from, nor cordially 
unite with, us. These, although few in number, are exceedingly ran- 
corous : they cannot, however, do us essential injury. 

In the Assembly of this State the federal party will certainly not 
have more, and in all probability they will have less, than 15: the 
whole is 100. In the Senate their whole number will not exceed Six : 
the Senate Consists of 32. 

If that wisdom which has hitherto characterised your administration 
shall be continued unto us, the federal party can have no hopes of 
re-ascending to power. The reduction of our taxes and the diminution 
of the public debt, are arguments which the worst reasoner in the 
union can justly appreciate. 

With very great respect, I am, Sir, your obedt. servant 

James Cheetham. 

Washington, June 17, 1803. 
Sir, — I have deferred answering your letter of May 30, until I 
could find the means of having paiment made in New York for the 
volume of the Watch-tower therein mentioned. Mr. Barnes tells me he 
has an account with Mr. Charles Ludlow of New York on which some 
little balance will perhaps be due, and authorizes me to say he will pay 
for that as well as what I am now to add. I have understood there is 
to be had in New York, an 8 vo edition of M c Kenzie's travels with the 
same maps which are in the 4 to edition. I will thank you to procure it 
for me. the American 8 vo edition is defective in it's maps, and the 
English 4 t0 edition is too large and cumbersome. I think I have seen 
advertized in some paper that an edition of Arrowsmith's map of the 
U S has been published at New York. I shall be glad to receive either 
that or the English issue, if to be had there, the latter would be pre- 
ferred because I know the engraving is superiorly well done, be so 
good as to deliver these articles to mr. Ludlow who will pay for and 
forward them to me. accept my best wishes. 

Th: Jefferson. 

His Excellenct Thomas Jefferson 

To the American Citizen Dr. 

April 26th. To Cash paid postage .37 

June 10. To Adams's Administration 2. 

" News to May last 1 Year 8. 

" pamphlets -31 

Augt. 9 To an Antidote 25 

" An Exposition .37| 

Sept. 8 To Woods Illuminati 37£ 



Feby. 24 To 1 of J. C's Nine letters 50 

Apr. 1. To a Letter &c 25 

May 1. To 1 Years News 8. 

" 1 Year's Watch Tower 3. 

April 14 To the Evening post from Apl. 22nd 1802 / 

to Apl 22» d 1803, 1 Year J 

June 21 To Binding a file of the Watch Tower 3. 

" 1 Copy of McKenzie's Travels . 3.50 

" Arrowsmiths Map of the United States ...... 15. 


1802 Contra. Cr. 
June 11 By Cash $11 

Febry 22. By cash 20 31 

New York, June 22d 1803. 

Rec d payment from Charles Ludlow Esq. 

James Cheetham. 

New York, July 25, 1804. 

Sir, — It is unpleasant to be under the necessity of appealing to 
you on a subject involving the duration of my establishment, and, to a 
degree, the unity of the Republican party in this State ; but since the 
necessity exists I take the liberty of troubling you with a few remarks. 

When I became the Editor of the Citizen, my late partner, Mr. 
Denniston, was extremely embarrassed in his pecuniary affairs. Like 
all other Republican Editors, he was discouraged, to use a mild term, 
during the awful period which preceded your election to the Presidency, 
by our opponents ; and the patronage of our friends was altogether 
inadequate to the maintenance of the press. Our memorable victory in 
this City in the year 1800, however, turned the political Scale in our 
favour and gave us a right to expect, what under your auspices we have 
realized, much public good. At this Joyous period the importunities 
of our political friends, corresponding with my own inclination, induced 
me to purchase o»ne half of the establishment and to assume the ex- 
clusive direction of the press. Mr. Burr, Mr. Swartwout (the 
Marshal) and Mr. Gelston (the Collector) were amongst the foremost 
of those who urged me to the undertaking. I was promised by all 
every encouragement. I assumed the direction of the paper on the 1st 
of May, 1801. I ought here to remark that, previous to our election 
in 1800, and until the period which I shall presently name, I had been 
on the most friendly terms of intercourse with Mr. Burr. 

In June, 1801, Mr. Gelston was appointed Collector. The printing 
business of his office netts a considerable annual sum, say $700. I 
flatter myself with a hope that the Considerations which had induced 


his appointment would have prevailed with him to give to the only 
Republican press in this City that support appertaining to his office 
and which had theretofore been carefully and uniformly imparted (by 
his predecessor) to those who had been warmly and invariably opposed 
to us as politicians. I had a double right to expect it. It was his due 
as a public officer, to give to the Republican press devoted to the sup- 
port of that very administration by which he had been distinguishedly 
promoted, and that support which was consonant to its dignity and 
honor. I expected it from his voluntary promises of aid previous to 
his appointment. 

When his appointment was here ascertained, I waited in person upon 
Mr. Gelston, and represented to him the pecuniary embarrassment of 
the press — the Cloud under which it had laboured — our expectation 
and the indispensability, of the printing business of the offices of the 
Government ; and Concluded with Soliciting that under his directions I 
was promised it. 

Daily intercourse, however, with Mr. Burr, from my Editorial 
Commencement, convinced me, in the short Space of ten weeks, that he 
had been unfaithful and was then unsound. At the latter end of July 
1801 I found that I must either abandon Mr. Burr and his associates, 
or oppose your administration. I had no hesitation in choosing the 
former. It is unnecessary, here, to enter into a detail of my reasons 
for the choice ; I have elsewhere said sufficient. 

Mr. Gelston had hardly time to extend the patronage of his office to 
my press before this seperation took place and he was unwilling to do 
so after. When I relinquished Mr. Burr, Mr. Gelston and the rest of 
his associates abandoned me. These facts are well known here. 

After Communicating to two friends, and to two only, the grounds of 
my Conviction of Mr. Burr's past infidelity and then disaffection, I 
prepared myself for that attack which has since been so successfully 
made. During the long and laborious Controversy which succeeded, 
private Considerations were merged in public disputation. I cared little, 
and had less time to enquire about my private concerns. But my in- 
clination, the welfare of a wife and five Children, and my Creditors, 
now compel me to enquire, and I find my affairs in a deplorable 
situation. In proportion as I have laboured for the public, I have 
experienced a diminution even of wonted encouragement. This, how- 
ever, by me, was anticipated ; for the necessary asperity of the attack 
unavoidably hazarded my establishment. 

From the period of my seperation from Mr. Burr to the present time, 
Mr. Gelston has invariably given the printing business of his office to 
two of our most inveterate political opponents! He has done this in the 
very face and defiance of repeated remonstrances. 

Seeing that I stood in need of his printing business (blanks &c.) and 


that my reiterated personal applications, resumed about six months ago, 
were unavailing, and made, early in May last a correct representation 
of my press and of the Conduct of Mr. Gelston, to Colonel Rutgers, 
Mr. Broome, our Lieutenant Governor, and the Mayor of this City. 
These gentlemen agreed with me that his Conduct was altogether with- 
out apology, and with a warmth of expression suited, as I thought, to 
the occasion, expressed their surprise and indignation. In the course 
of that month they had an interview with him on the subject at Col. 
Rutgers's by appointment, and Mr. Gelston, in delicate terms, promised, 
as I understand, that, in future I should have the entire [word omitted] 
of the printing business of his office. 

This promise has not, however, been fulfilled either in whole or in 
part. He still continues to give his business, partly to Mr. James 
Deam, a British Soldier during the whole of the R evolutionary War, and 
now a malignant Federalist, and partly to Mr. William A. Davis, a 
Burrite, a character more odious among us, if possible, than that of a 

Finding that private applications, however respectable, were unavail- 
ing, that my press was on the brink of ruin, and that immediate relief 
was all essential to its continuance; by way of exciting public enquiry 
into the Cause, I advertised my establishment for sale. 

This advertisement induced a private meeting of distinguished Repub- 
licans from every ward of this City, who, by Committee, requested me 
to wait upon them in person. I did so and in answer to their enquiries 
gave them at large a statement of the situation of my press and of Mr. 
Gelston's hostile Conduct towards it. They unanimously agreed to 
appoint a committee to wait upon and remonstrate with him on the 

The Committee waited upon Mr. Gelston, and at a subsequent meet- 
ing reported that he had promised to give me in future the whole of his 
printing business. This was about three weeks ago. But as Mr. 
Gelston's word was doubted by all present, the meeting appointed a 
Superintending Committee to enquire whether he would perform his 
promise, and if not to call forthwith a public meeting of the Republicans 
in order to petition, respectfully, the executive of the United States for 
his removal. The Mayor was present at the meeting. 

Mr. Gelston has not fulfilled the promise which he solemnly made to 
the Committee, and it has therefore become a Question, one indeed 
which excites much sensibility, and in which there is but one opinion 
among our friends, whether my press is to be destroyed by his continu- 
ance in, or preserved by his removal from, office, and the appointment 
in his place of a Citizen, more friendly to the Republican party? As 
Mr. Gelston is universally known to have acted uniformly against the 
best and ablest friends of your administration ever since he came into 


office, so perhaps there is no man amongst us who is more unpopular or 
less respected. 

For various reasons which will be obvious to you I wish to avoid a 
public meeting. It would be a measure from which many unpleasant 
reflections might result. It would place in the hands of those who are 
opposed to the Government, a formidable weapon. I shall do every 
thing in my power to prevent it. But such is the warmth manifested 
by our friends, and excited by Mr. Gelston's opposition to what they 
deem a matter of right and not of favour, that I much doubt my 
ability to prevent it. I feel more delicacy as it regards you than myself. 
If our friends were of opinion that the press could be better managed, 
or with more oeconomy, by any other person, I would relinquish it with- 
out a struggle. But they are pleased to express an opinion that events 
of moment may occur in which I may be of Service to the Country. 
They will not permit me to dispose of the establishment. 

With all possible deference and the most sincere and affectionate at- 
tachment I submit this matter to your decision, with a full assurance 
that, whatever it may be, it will meet with the entire approbation of 
your Excellency's Most obedient and devoted servant, 

James Cheetham. 

His Excellency Thomas Jefferson 

To the Proprietor of the Am. Citizen Dr. 


Augt. 5 To a Copy of the letter to a friend $0,371 

Dec. 9 To a Copy of Aristides .50 


Jany. 1 To 8 Mo. Citizen, @ $8 5.34 

To 8 Mo. Evening Post, @ $8 5.34 

23 To a reply to Aristides 50 

Feby. 13. To Remarks on the Merchants Bank .25 

May 1. To 4 Mo. Citizen @ $10 p. Ann 3.34 

To 4 Mo. E. Post, @ $10 p. Ann 3.34 

24. To a file of the Watch Tower, b d & lettered 7. 

Deer. 3. To a Copy of letters on our affairs with Spain .50 


July 1. To 14 Mo. Citizen, @ $10 11.67 

To 14 Mo. E. Post, @ $10 11.67 

16 To a file of the W. Tower b d & lettered 7. 

Contra, Cr 56.82* 


May 18. By Cash recev d from Mr. Richards , . . . 25.80 

31. 2\ 

Received payment of the Above in full, New York, 
August 2, 1805, for the proprietor. 

Abraham Asten. 
(pr. Mr. Charles Ludlow 

via John Barnes.) 


New York, October 18, 1806. 

Sir, — Marc Antonie Alexis Giraud, Commissary of the Emperor of 
France for the Eastern States, residing at Boston, has many years been 
one of my subscribers. Mr. Giraud called at my office on the 16th. 
Inst, to direct the discontinuance of his Paper to Boston and to order it 
to be sent to him at Lexington, Kentucky, where he informed me he 
was going to reside all winter. As this change of residence may be 
political, I have deemed it my duty to inform you of it. 
I am your obt. Servt 

James Cheetham. 

Washington, Nov. 6, 07. 

Sir, — Your account amounting to 30 : D. tho' received some time 
ago had escaped my attention, having occasion to make a remittance 
to Mr. Gelston I have included that sum with his, and must therefore 
ask the favor of you to call on him for it. the time of my retirement 
being now not very distant, I am beginning to retire from paper reading. 
I cannot begin better than with the New York Evening post, of which 
in truth I have scarcely opened one for two years past. I will there- 
fore pray you to discontinue forwarding them to me. Accept my 
salutations and respects. 

Th : Jefferson. 







Samuel Edward Herrick was born April 6, 1841, in 
Southampton, Long Island ; he died in Boston December 4, 
1904. He was the son of Austin Herrick, sea-captain, and 
Mary Wells Jagger, being of the seventh generation in direct 
descent from James Herrick, the first settler of that name in 

The Herrick family is an English family, and is supposed to 
derive descent from Eric the Forester; and if this guess is 
true, from an important family in Sweden. In Potter's 
" Charnwood Forest," page 80, there is a note which may be 
of interest here : " I found on the forest a very prevailing 
tradition that this Eric assembled a large army at the Copt- 
Oak on Charnwood, in order to resist the Norman invader; 
that this Eric did bravely resist William I, and afterwards on 
being vanquished became one of his generals, rests on better 
evidence than tradition." The English name Herrick seems 
to have been evolved through the mutations of time from the 
original Eirikr. 

Samuel Edward Herrick was a lineal descendant from Sir 
William Eyryk of Stretton, who was commissioned to attend 
the Prince of Wales on his expedition into Germany in 1355. 
Of the same family was the poet Robert Herrick, and also Sir 
William, "a famous merchant" in the reign of Queen Eliza- 
beth, to whom he became a money-lender, as also to her 
courtiers Leicester and Essex, Sidney and Raleigh. There is 
still standing near the town of Southborongh in Leicestershire, 
a beautiful mansion, on the fine estate of Beau Manor Park, 
where successive members of the family have lived for the last 
two hundred and fifty years. This house was built in the 


Jacobean style in 1840, on the exact site of two previous 
dwellings owned by the Herrick family. On the stone gate- 
posts is carved the family crest, the bull's head that we find 
on an old gravestone in Southampton, Long Island, marking 
the grave of " Mr. William Herrick, Esq.," who was born in 
1654 and died in 1708, the son of James Herrick, one of the 
original settlers of Southampton in 1640, then under the 
jurisdiction of Connecticut. 

Regarding this family crest the following note appears from 
the hand of the subject of this memoir : " Since my memory 
there was hanging in the old house of my immediate ancestors 
at Southampton, Long Island, an ancient coat of arms, which 
had been there from time immemorial. It was a great protec- 
tion to the family in the days of the Revolution, and to the 
farm while the British troops under Sir William Erskine were 
quartered in Southampton. So my grandmother, Phoebe P., 
wife of William, used to say. That coat of arms was borrowed 
by Edward C. Herrick, librarian of Yale College, for General 
Jedediah Herrick to be copied for the Register which he 

The remark may here be made how far the blood has come 
that flows in the veins of a representative American. In the 
quiet life of this Boston preacher contributions meet from 
New England, from Old England, and from the Scandinavian 
world. Such is the far reference of the life that meets one 
every day, and its pathos. To such a distance the old races 
have come ; so wide have been the wanderings of the chil- 
dren's children. The light and shadow of an ancient world are 
seen every day in the faces of our fellow-citizens. 

The significant events in Dr. Herrick's life may be quickly 
told. Birth in a happy human home full of love and Christian 
faith ; an eager, normal, and serious boyhood ; the customary 
preparation for college in this country fifty years ago at the 
Southampton Academy ; matriculation in Amherst College as 
a sophomore at the age of fifteen, and graduation with distinc- 
tion in the class of 1859 ; two years as a country schoolmaster 
at Bridgehampton, Long Island; the usual professional train- 
ing at Princeton Theological Seminary, followed by ordination 
and settlement as a Christian preacher in the old Dutch village 
of Wappinger's Falls, in the State of New York, on October 13, 
1863 ; his marriage, April 6, 1864, to Sophia Wood Foster, of 


Quogue, Long Island, of which union there was born one child, 
a daughter Margaret ; his pastorate in the Broadway Congre- 
gational Church in Chelsea from 1864 to 1871. In 1871 Mr. 
Herrick became associate pastor with Dr. Kirk of the Mt. 
Vernon Church of Boston. Upon the death of Dr. Kirk he 
became sole pastor, and he remained in the service of this 
church until his own death on Sunday evening, December 4, 

During his ministry in Boston many appeals came to Dr. 
Herrick to serve in other fields. His Alma Mater, at different 
times, offered him two professorships. Calls came to him from 
more than twenty churches all the way from Providence to 
San Francisco. He declined all these appeals. His church in 
Boston needed his leadership. He led it from a place of iso- 
lation to new opportunity, and in addition to a rich ministry 
to his own generation he saved a religious institution to the 

Dr. Herrick published little. This is a subject for regret. 
He had a productive mind, but he was without literary 
ambition. He published one book, " The Heretics of Yester- 
day," a work of uncommon breadth and insight. He was for 
some years a preacher at Yale University, and in 1881 delivered 
a lecture before the Divinity School in New Haven. He 
received the degree of Doctor of Divinity in 1878 from Amherst 

The good preacher is of many types and of great varieties, 
and no man can hope to combine the essential merits of all. 
Indiscriminate praise is no praise. There are in the Scottish 
pulpit the three distinct types of preacher represented by 
Chalmers, Guthrie, and Caird ; in the English pulpit the types 
presented in Robertson, Liddon, and Spurgeon ; in the Ameri- 
can pulpit the types exemplified in Channing and Bushnell,in 
Beecher and Brooks. The preacher must know himself and 
his type. 

Dr. Herrick was a preacher to thoughtful men. He could 
not be light or entertaining. His type was that of the preacher 
whose message, while penetrated with feeling, must neverthe- 
less come through the intellect. His characteristic sermons 
were sermons of large and splendid vision. In their construc- 
tion his eye seemed to be fixed upon some vision ; he seemed 
in his speaking to be following this vision, translating it, part 


after part, into the large and luminous order of his own dis- 
course. There was little reasoning in his sermons. He could 
not brook the delay of argumentation. He beheld and he 
invited his hearers to behold. If they did not see, it was 
because they were blind. 

The vision, wide, rich, consoling, was the primary force in 
his sermon. With the vision came, however, a pervading, 
glowing, remarkably elevated pressure of feeling. The beat 
of his heart was in every sentence ; the ring of his conscience 
and the music of his rare sympathies could be heard more and 
more distinctly as the discourse went forward, and when it 
ended, a dream from the unseen had visited his hearers. 

A man with a great and burdened heart is impatient of 
much remark upon his manner of speech. It seems like an 
impertinence to dwell upon the prophet's dress when the 
prophet's words are ringing in one's ears. Yet we are told 
that John the Baptist, the last great prophet of the Hebrew 
dispensation, came clad in camel's hair and living on locusts 
and wild honey. There was a certain harmony between 
the message and the wild style of the man. Between the 
message and style of Dr. Herrick there was a remarkable 
harmony. Indeed part of the charm and power of Dr. 
Herrick's ministry lay in the extraordinary felicity of his style. 
It was a kind of style to which very few are equal, which 
would run inferior natures to certain destruction. It had a 
very large Latin element, and yet it was all so toned to Chris- 
tian thought, so suffused with high feeling, so touched with 
moving associations, so instinct with life and the beauty and 
tenderness of life, that its stately words, its measured tread, its 
high bearing of precision and dignity added immensely to the 
effect upon the imagination and heart of his audience. Here, 
again, the style was the man. He was an enthusiastic Latin- 
ist, and at the same time he was steeped in the best culture 
of our English tongue, and through his imagination no less 
than through his heart there had flowed from infancy the pure 
stream from the greatest literary monument and model in the 
world, — the English Bible. Such was his type, a preacher to 
rare souls in a rare time, in the best sense, a select preacher 
to elect spirits, thoughtful, luminous, of spontaneous and per- 
vading spirituality, elevated, serene, a prophet of the larger 
vision and the better hope. 


Three main sources of influence upon this man's life may 
be noted. There was the influence of nature upon his spirit. 
He was born within sight and sound of the sea. It was the 
early natural wonder of his childhood and boyhood. It became 
his playmate and his teacher. It drew to itself his sympathies, 
and from his earliest years to his latest he was the eager 
sympathizer with human life upon the sea. The sailor touched 
his heart with a power that hardly any other representative 
of his kind possessed. It is obvious to all who knew him that 
to the influence of the sea upon his young spirit are to be 
traced, in some degree at least, the breadth of imagination that 
was his characteristic, the depth and seriousness of feeling, 
the capacity in him for the light ripples of mirth and the great 
surges of spiritual passion, the massive substance of his thought 
and the ever-changing colors and hues of his mode of speech, 
the stable, abiding element of his character and the perpetual 
movement of life, the retreat upon the Infinite like the deep 
withdrawing into the greater deep, and the flow of his spirit 
like the return of the tide upon the land. 

There was the still deeper influence of his early home. In 
his inborn and cultivated refinement' his mother's grace and 
honor lived again. His father was a man of unusual strength 
and courage. He had been a sea-captain and to the end of 
his days was known as Captain Herrick. He was an Elder in 
the Presbyterian church of his town. On one occasion the 
preacher happened to be a proslavery advocate, and told the 
people that they could do nothing better for the black race 
than build and equip a ship to enter the African slave trade. 
Elder Herrick rose in his pew while the sermon was being 
preached, and protested against the preacher's doctrine and 
sentiments with such vigor that the length of that sermon was 
mercifully abridged, and with such grace as to retain the 
friendship of the offending minister. This strong and good 
man entered into the structure of his son's existence. 

Deepest of all was the influence upon him of his own whole- 
some human home. The secret of a good minister's life is 
to be found in the fountains of domestic honor. All great 
character rests upon this human foundation. The prophetic 
message from the beginning of the world has come in and 
through family life. The first great revelation of God comes 
in the vision of the worthy human lover ; it is confirmed and 


increased in the settled reverence of the husband and father ; 
it is further expanded and touched with a new spirit in the 
sorrows that hallow and in the hopes that sustain family life 
and love. The prophet who comes through this discipline in 
honor and through this sacred possession to the great body of 
the gathered insight of Christian Faith is a fortunate prophet, 
and such a prophet was Samuel Edward Herrick. 



The stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 9th instant, 
at three o'clock, p. M. ; the President in the chair. The rec- 
ord of the Annual Meeting was read and approved ; and 
reports were submitted by the Librarian and Corresponding 

George Walter Prothero, LL.D., of London, England, was 
elected a Corresponding Member. 

The President, for a Committee appointed by the Council, 
reported a series of amendments to the By-Laws. The amend- 
ments were discussed, and the subject was postponed for fur- 
ther consideration at the next meeting, in accordance with the 

The proposed amendments are as follows : 

Article 3, Chapter II. of the By-Laws is as follows : 

Art. 3. Fifteen members shall be a quorum for all purposes ex- 
cept the election of members, as hereinbefore provided ; and excepting, 
also, for alterations of the By-Laws, which shall not be made unless 
twenty persons are present, nor unless the subject has either been dis- 
cussed at a previous meeting, or reported on by a committee appointed 
for the purpose. 

Owing to the resignation of Mr. Smith, and the appointment 
of a new Treasurer, handling a much larger body of securities 
than had been handled by any Treasurer up to the time the 
present By-Laws were framed, certain changes in them have 
become expedient. As it is, in the opinion of the Council, 
desirable, for reasons which will be obvious, that the proposed 
amendments, if ordered, should take effect at the earliest con- 
venient date, and as they could not be acted upon until October 
unless proposed and made matter for discussion at this meeting, 
with a view to their adoption at the June meeting, the Council 


report the following proposed amendments, and submit them 
for immediate discussion. 

An additional article is proposed in relation to the Treasu- 
rer, to be numbered Article 1, Chapter VII., in the following 
form : 

Art. I. The Treasurer shall give bonds to such amount as the 
Council shall from time to time prescribe for the proper performance 
of his duties, and to secure the Society from possible loss in connection 
with the same. The cost of such bonding shall be paid by the Society, 
The Council shall further make such provision as may be reasonable 
and proper for payment of a book-keeper or accountant to aid the 
Treasurer in the performance of his duties. 

The articles now numbered 1 of Chapter VII., and 2 of 
Chapter VII., shall then be respectively numbered Articles 
2 and 3. 

Articles 5 and 6 of Chapter I. of the present By-Laws read 
as follows : 

Art. 5. Each Resident Member shall pay twenty-five dollars at the 
time of his admission, and ten dollars each first of January afterward, 
into the treasury of the Society, for its general purposes ; but any mem- 
ber shall be exempted from the annual payment if, at any time after his 
admission, he shall pay into the treasury one hundred and fifty dollars 
in addition to what he may before have paid ; and all commutation fees 
shall be funded by the Treasurer, and the interest only used for the 
current expenses of the Society. Each Resident Member shall be 
entitled to receive a copy of all the regular publications of the Society, 
issued after his election, without charge ; and all members who have 
paid the commutation fee shall be entitled to the privilege of the Li- 
brary, and to copies of the publications, for life, even should their mem- 
bership cease by removal from the State or by resignation. 

Art. 6. If any person elected as a Resident Member shall neglect, 
for one year after being notified of his election, to pay his admission- 
fee, his election shall be void ; and if any Resident Member shall neglect 
to pay his annual assessment for two years after it shall have become 
due and his attention shall have been called to this article in the By- 
laws, he shall cease to be a member ; provided, however, it shall be in 
the power of the Treasurer, with the consent of the President, to dis- 
pense (sub silentio) with the payment of the assessment, whenever, in 
any special instance, they may think it advisable to do so. Each person 
who shall be elected a Resident Member shall, when notified of it, be 
furnished by the Corresponding Secretary with a copy of this Article 
and the preceding one. 


In view of the present financial condition of the Society, it 
is proposed to revoke both of these articles, substituting there- 
for the following : — 

Art. 5. No entrance fee or annual payment shall be required of 
members, whether Resident, Corresponding, or Honorary, except such 
as may from time to time be imposed by special vote of the Society. 

Art. 6. Each member shall be entitled to receive a copy of all the 
regular publications of the Society issued after his election without 

The Council calls attention to these proposed amendments 
of the By-Laws, which will be formally notified in the call of 
the June meeting, and then be submitted for action. Mean- 
while the proposed changes are reported for discussion at the 
present meeting, in conformity with Article 3 of Chapter II. of 
the By-Laws. 

On motion of the Treasurer, it was 

Voted, That the income of the Massachusetts Historical Trust 
Fund for the past year be retained in the Treasury, and ap- 
plied to such purposes as the Council of the Society shall direct. 

The President, in accordance with a vote of the Society at 
its last meeting, presented and read the following minute : 

It is unnecessary to remind the Society that at its Annual 
Meeting, held here last month, a change took place in the 
office of Treasurer, our associate Mr. Lord replacing Mr. 
Smith, who declined a re-election to the position he had held 
for thirty successive years. In grateful recognition of a ten- 
ure of office both exceptionally long and faithful, it was, at a 
recent meeting of the Council, directed that a memorandum 
should be prepared and submitted at the present session of 
the Society which, spread upon its records, should bear testi- 
mony to our appreciation of valuable services gratuitously 
rendered through a period of many years. Naturally I turned 
back, when complying with this injunction, to the record of 
the meeting at which Mr. Smith was first chosen to be our 
Treasurer, — the Annual Meeting of 1877, — held Wednes- 
day, April 11, in the original Dowse room in the old Tremont 
Street building. To us who participated in the continuous 
centennial celebrations of those 3 r ears, 1877 does not seem re- 
mote, — indeed " the tumult and the shouting" still linger in 



our ears ; but that the accession of Mr. Smith to the treasurer- 
ship of the Society occurred hard upon the lifetime of a gen- 
eration since becomes very apparent as the record of that April 
meeting is scanned. Mr. Winthrop, for twenty-two years al- 
ready President of the Society, occupied this chair; but of the 
thirteen members then elected to office three only now survive, 
our senior member. Dr. Green, then as now Librarian, but 
whose name stood, not at the head, but forty-second on our 
Resident roll, Mr. Smith, newly elected Treasurer, and our as- 
sociate Mr. Warren, the junior member of the Standing Com- 
mittee as that year composed. Since 1877 the Society has been 
practically renewed ; for, of the ninety-nine names of living 
associates then borne upon the roll, among which that of Mr. 
Smith appeared in the sixty-seventh place, fourteen only are 
on it now. To-day Mr. Smith stands sixth. Bat it is an even 
more suggestive fact that of the present Resident membership 
more than one half of the names on the roll have been placed 
there since the April meeting of 1897, the last held in the 
Tremont Street building, when Mr. Smith had already been 
Treasurer a score of years. 

Though, since the organization of the Society one hundred 
and sixteen years ago, it has had eight different Treasurers, the 
combined terms of service of Mr. Smith and his immediate pred- 
ecessor, Mr. Frothingham, cover more years than are covered 
by the united terms of all those who preceded them. The first 
six Treasurers served an aggregate period of fifty-six years; Mr. 
Frothingham and Mr. Smith together served for a period of 
sixty years. As matter of record not without interest, the 
list is as follows : 

William Tudor, 1791-1796. 

George R. Minot, 1796-1799. 

William Tudor, 1799-1803 (second time). 

Josiah Quincy, 1803-1820. 

James Savage, 1820-1839. 

Nahum Mitchell, 1 839-1 845. 

Peleg W. Chandler, 1845-1847. 

Richard Frothingham, 1847-1877. 

Charles C. Smith, 1877-1907. 

To us of the Society, however, much the most interesting as 
well as noticeable feature of Mr. Smith's term of service as 


Treasurer has been the very gratifying increase in our re- 
sources and income. In the earlier years the duties of our 
Treasurer were, comparatively speaking, nominal. In 1877 the 
Society owned the Tremont Street building subject to a heavy 
mortgage, its equity being valued at some $18,000. Its per- 
manent funds, not invested in the building, amounted to about 
$50,000, and it had about $7500 in cash or quick assets. A total 
of approximately $75,000, the entire accumulation of eighty-six 
years. Financially, results up to 1877 had not been consider- 
able ; nor could the outlook have been deemed propitious. 

Ten years passed ; years of narrow means and resources 
carefully husbanded. At their close, in April, 1887, Mr. 
Smith was able to report nine permanent funds aggregating 
over $74,000 belonging to the Society, the discharge of the 
original mortgage note, and a beginning made in the reinvest- 
ment of permanent funds, up to that time largely invested in 
the Tremont Street building. The accumulated property of 
the Society then amounted approximately to $143,000. 

Another ten years later, in 1897, the Tremont Street build- 
ing was sold. Our accumulation had now risen to an aggregate 
of over $310,000. 

Finally, when, the other day, at the close of yet another de- 
cennial period, the Smith stewardship was closed, our real 
estate, free from every incumbrance, is valued by the city as- 
sessors at $196,000, and our invested permanent funds and cash 
in hand were represented by securities and deposits having a 
market value of over $450,000. Truly, during those thirty 
years, our talent had not been kept laid up in a napkin ! That 
our annual income had mounted from $11,000, in 1877, to 
$24,000, in 1907, does not tell the story of increase ; for, dur- 
ing the earlier period, three fourths of our income were de- 
rived from a lease of the larger portion of our Tremont Street 
building, the Society reserving for its own use the two upper 
stories only. And when, in October, 1894, this lease expired 
and the leased premises became vacant, we found ourselves, 
as no new tenant could be obtained, badly crippled. In 
1895-1896 our entire income was less than $5000 ; and the free 
income, but $1500, " did not suffice to meet the requirements 
of the organization when reduced to the most economical 
basis." 1 Now we are in exclusive occupancy of our whole 
1 2 Proceedings, vol. x. p. 575. 


building, and in the enjoyment of a handsome annual surplus 

That these results were altogether, or even in greatest part, 
due to Mr. Smith's prudent or skilful management, he would 
be the last to suggest. On the contrary, they bore evidence 
to frequent and generous gifts and bequests from benefactors 
whose names may be read in every annual report of the Treas- 
urer. None the less those results, this great change, either 
came about or was brought about during Mr. Smith's steward- 
ship. How much of it was due to the action of the Treasurer, 
and how much to all other causes combined, it would be diffi- 
cult, perhaps impossible, accurately to say. It is, however, 
right and proper that the general fact should now be of record. 

When Mr. Smith's predecessor retired after a similarly pro- 
longed term of service, the Society contented itself with a 
somewhat perfunctory vote of thanks bearing witness to its 
sense of his faithful service and "especially for the judg- 
ment and devotion with which Mr. Frothingham had " as a 
member of the government during that period " watched 
over its interests." It is to my mind, and to the mind of the 
Council generally, matter of regret that the action then taken 
was limited to this formal and wholly uninteresting record. 
Richard Frothingham was for thirty-four years (1846-1880) ac- 
tive in our Society, and he stood also in the front rank of that 
remarkable group of historical writers and investigators, mem- 
bers of the Society during the mid years of the last century, to 
whose accomplishments it was my privilege to bear witness 
from this chair exactly a year ago, when the bust of James 
Savage now before you was unveiled. But Richard Frothing- 
ham, like Mr. Savage and even Robert C. Winthrop, is fast 
becoming a shadowy figure of the past. Not one in four of 
you who now occupy these chairs ever listened to his voice or 
can recall his face. Yet he filled the important position of our 
Treasurer for nearly a third of a century ; he was distinctly 
one of the notable worthies of our order. It is, therefore, 
deeply to be regretted that portraits not only of Mr. Frothing- 
ham, but of the line of distinguished men who preceded him 
in the same position, should not have been provided for at 
the times of their resignations, and now be in our possession. 
They would constitute a most interesting memorial as well as 
precious possession. 


In the judgment of the Council, a precedent should there- 
fore now be established, hereafter, let us hope, to be faithfully 
observed. The omission in the case of Mr. Frothingham should 
not be repeated in the case of Mr. Smith or his successors. 

I am directed, therefore, to report the following votes for 
the action of the Society : 

Voted, That the thanks of the Society are presented to 
Charles Card Smith for thirty years' faithful and successful 
service as Treasurer of the Society, to which position he has 
recently declined re-election. 

Voted, That the series of reports of record in the printed 
Proceedings of the Society since 1878 bear the highest pos- 
sible testimony to the judgment, devotion and success with 
which the office has been administered during its tenure by 
Mr. Smith, and of the grateful estimation in which his services 
are held. 

Voted, That the Council be empowered and instructed to 
secure a portrait of Mr. Smith for preservation in the collections 
of the Society. 

Voted, That the Council be further requested to take meas- 
ures to secure for the Society a similar portrait of Richard 
Frothingham, its Treasurer from 1847 to 1877;. and also, so 
far as may be practicable, portraits of the predecessors of Mr. 
Frothingham as Treasurers of the Society. 

The votes as recommended were unanimously adopted. 
The President announced the death of Hon. Daniel H. 
Chamberlain, and read the following tribute to his memory : 

It is now eight months, an interval of somewhat unusual 
length, 1 since the presiding officer was called upon to announce 
a vacancy in our Resident membership, arising from death. The 
last such was that caused by the demise of Dr. Slafter, on the 
22d of September, 1906. I have to-day to announce another. 
Daniel Henry Chamberlain died at Charlottesville, Virginia, 
Saturday, April 13. 

Of Mr. Chamberlain I shall have something presently to say 
both directly and through another ; for it so chanced my asso- 
ciation with him dates far back, and, though for a long period 
interrupted, has of late years been renewed, and towards the 

1 2 Proceedings, vol. x. pp. 8, 9. 


end, though carried on almost wholly by correspondence, had 
become close. In the first place, however, I will, in conformity 
with our practice, refer only to Mr. Chamberlain's connection 
with the Society. 

Chosen at the February meeting of 1900, Mr. Chamberlain 
at the time of his death had been a little more than seven years 
one of our Resident Members. At first, living in West Brook- 
field on the ancestral farm he had re-acquired in his later }<ears, 
and otherwise much occupied, he seldom, if indeed ever, at- 
tended our meetings ; but between May, 1902, and October, 
1904, at which time he went abroad for reasons of health, he 
was constantly here, evincing, through frequent contributions 
to it, a lively interest in our work. Returning to this country 
early in July a year ago with both general health and his hear- 
ing greatly impaired, he did not again reside in Massachusetts. 
Retaining his citizenship, he sought a less rigorous climate ; 
and at last, stricken by the disease of which he died, his life 
slowly ebbed away at Charlottesville, under the immediate 
shadow of Jefferson's Monticello. 

Never a member of the Council of the Society, or serving 
on any of its committees, his first contribution to our printed 
Proceedings was in a paper entitled " The Historical Concep- 
tion of the United States Constitution and Union" submitted 
at the May meeting held in this room five years ago yester- 
day. A month later, at the June meeting, he paid a tribute 
to our associate George Bigelow Chase, whose death was that 
day announced. Though at the time absent from the State, 
he, sixteen months later, forwarded an appreciative paper, 
which appears in our Proceedings, commemorative of Edward 
McCrady, the historian of South Carolina, a Corresponding 
Member of this Society whose death had recently occurred. 
A year later, before going abroad for the last time, he was 
present at our October, 1904, meeting and participated in the 
discussion which arose ; and what he then said clearly fore- 
shadowed that which has only now occurred. Constantly 
active while abroad, and to the last moment of his life at 
work with mind and pen, he from time to time forwarded 
contributions which have found a place in our Proceedings 
or elsewhere. Papers entitled "A Third Bunker's Hill," "A 
Word More on an Important Topic," and " A Great Historical 
Acquisition" form a part of our still unpublished twentieth 


volume. His keen interest in the Society and its activities 
ended only with his life. 

Here, according to the usual practice, I should stop, leaving 
others to characterize Mr. Chamberlain more fully. But Mr. 
Morton Dexter, upon whom this would naturally have de- 
volved, is necessarily absent ; and so, as I have already inti- 
mated, I propose in this case to make an exception to the rule. 
I have something further to say. 

My personal relations with Mr. Chamberlain date back to 
the period of the War of Secession, as he very properly and 
discriminatingly preferred to designate x that great struggle 
first called by us the Southern Rebellion and then the Civil 
War. When, in the autumn of 1864, I was commissioned 
lieutenant-colonel of the Fifth Massachusetts Cavalry (col- 
ored), I found, on assuming command of the regiment in the 
absence of Colonel H. S. Russell, that Chamberlain, then a 
recent graduate of Yale, held in it a lieutenant's commission. 
Subsequently, when I became colonel, he was regimental 
adjutant. We were thus thrown into close relations. After 
the close of the war, my own health having broken down in 
consequence of long service under somewhat trying conditions, 
I resigned my commission, and did not again see Chamberlain, 
or, indeed, hear of him, until he loomed up a national char- 
acter, first as Attorney-General of South Carolina, and subse- 
quently as Governor of that State during the reconstruction 
period. This portion of the story of his life (1868-1877) 
has been recently told in graphic terms and a judicial spirit 
by our associate Mr. Rhodes, 2 and I now refer to it for intro- 
ductory purposes only. 

Years afterwards, from 1884 to 1890, I was President of 
the Union Pacific Railroad Company. At that time the United 
States government was represented on the Board of Direction 
of that corporation by five appointed members; and while I 
was its president, it so chanced that two of those members 
were from the South. Both had seen much service in the 
Confederate army ; one indeed bore on his face the scars of a 
terrible wound. The first of the two was General E. P. Alex- 
ander, prominent as an artillery officer in the Army of North- 

1 2 Proceedings, vol. xviii. pp. 13, 14. See, also, on this point debate in the 
United States Senate, in Congressional Globe of Friday, January 11, 1907. 

2 History of the United States, vol. vii. pp. 142-173. 


ern Virginia, and the author of an extremely interesting 
volume only recently published, entitled " Military Memoirs 
of a Confederate." When General Alexander presently re- 
signed his seat in the Board, he was succeeded by his relative 
by marriage, Colonel A. C. Haskell, of South, Carolina. 
With both of these gentlemen my official relations were close, 
and I soon grew to feel a strong personal regard for them. 
They represented the best type of southern character, — a type 
of a very high class, and one which must be met intimately to 
be appreciated,. — a type with which we of the North are as a 
rule not familiar. Chamberlain had been brought in contact 
with it ; he understood and appreciated it. Indeed, I do not 
know of any such striking and sympathetic estimate of it as 
one I heard given by him in this very room. He then, speak- 
ing from " much and varied experience," referred to the 
"typical Southern gentleman" as "a distinct and really noble 
growth of our American soil. For, if fortitude under good 
and under evil fortune, if endurance without complaint of 
what comes in the tide of human affairs, if a grim clinging to 
ideals once charming, if vigor and resiliency of character and 
spirit under defeat and poverty and distress, if a steady love 
of learning and letters when libraries were lost in flames and 
the wreckage of war, if self-restraint when the long-delayed 
relief at last came, — if, I say, all these qualities are parts of 
real heroism, if these qualities can vivify and ennoble a man or 
a people, then our own South may lay claim to an honored 
place among the differing types of our great common race," 
General Alexander and Colonel Haskell I am able from per- 
sonal observation to pronounce distinct specimens of this type. 
I soon learned to recognize them as such. 

And now we approach the catastrophe. Our associate Mr. 
Rhodes has told the story, unconscious wholly, so far as the 
present occasion is concerned, of its dramatic features. It can 
be found in the forty-fourth chapter of his History. I read 
it there a few weeks ago, and from my own personal knowl- 
edge and private correspondence identified the dramatis per- 
sonal and supplied the missing links. It is history ; and, as 
such, properly finds its place in our Proceedings. 

In the closing months of 1876 and the opening months of 
1877 the wretched pantomime known in history as Congres- 
sional Reconstruction had worn itself out. It still, however, 


held the stage in South Carolina ; though there by virtue 
solely of Governor D. H. Chamberlain's vigor, and the reform- 
atory life his personality had infused into the moribund body. 
Long subsequently the statement was made that " no proud 
people ever suffered such indignities or endured such humili- 
ation and degradation " as had then been inflicted on South 
Carolina, and in this statement there was no exaggeration ; for, 
as was truly observed in another connection, " History till now 
gives no account of a conqueror so cruel as to place his van- 
quished foes under the dominion of their former slaves." 1 
Chamberlain, struggling desperately to accomplish the impos- 
sible, was the one redeeming factor in the South Carolina situ- 
ation. The great aim, the strongest desire, of the South 
Carolinians was to throw off the reconstruction yoke at home, 
— to get in control of their local affairs once more. My sup- 
position has always been that, recognizing the inevitable, 
Chamberlain's scheme was to have himself elected to the 
United States Senate; then to resign the office of Governor, 
and to be succeeded by a South Carolinian. Moreover, I had 
supposed that the best people of the State, to whom Chamber- 
lain had by his course greatly commended himself, were dis- 
posed cheerfully, even gladly, to acquiesce in this arrangement. 
The desire of their hearts was to secure control of their State 
government; for that they would concede representation in 
the Senate, or indeed anything in the national field. Thus all 
would be pleasantly arranged. 

The closely contested presidential election of 1876 suddenly 
changed the whole aspect of affairs. Encouraged by the 
national outlook, the issue was sharply drawn in South Caro- 
lina by the root-and-branch white-man's party, determined to 
make no terms with the reconstruction regime or any of those 
identified with it. Once more, and for the last time, the 
national government intervened. A close vote resulted at 
the November election ; and recourse was then had by the 
reconstructionists to the returning-board device. But, as 
may be learned from Mr. Rhodes's pages, the reconstruction 
returning-board played an important part during the closing 
months of 1876 in States other than South Carolina, — indeed, 
as a bit of political machinery, it was manifestly overworked. 
While, accordingly, in the outcome of the national election, it 

1 Rhodes, vol. vii. p. 141 ; vol. vi. p. 323. 


secured the presidency for the candidate of the Republican party, 
practically, though by tacit agreement, this result was acqui- 
esced in with the understanding that all national armed support 
should be withdrawn from the last remaining reconstruction 
governments. This was in reality one of the conditions pre- 
cedent to the installation of President Hayes, — the flag was 
to wave over States and not over provinces. The opportunity 
of South Carolina had thus come; Chamberlain was to miss 
his destiny. Driven from the executive chair of the State, he 
was not to represent South Carolina in the national Senate. 
Instinctively feeling that the hour of redemption was at hand, 
the Carolinians now claimed all; and in the forefront of those 
who then asserted the white man's ascendency, disposed to stop 
at absolutely no action necessary to secure it, was Haskell. His 
path thus crossed that of Chamberlain. It was a very grim 
situation; for Haskell gave the unmistakable impression of 
being a man of his word, — one of those who could be counted 
on to do anything he said he proposed to do, though certain, 
perhaps, himself to drop a moment later. Chamberlain wisely 
recognized the fact, and yielded to the inevitable. Further to 
have contended would have been to challenge destruction. 
The outcome is now matter of record. 

Years passed. Fate so ordered things that I in process of 
time got to know Haskell better than I knew Chamberlain ; 
and I can truthfully say that of those I have met in life there 
have been few to whom I have felt more drawn, or have grown 
to entertain a sense of greater personal regard. In the closing 
days of 1902 1 had occasion to visit South Carolina to deliver 
an address at Charleston. I afterwards here gave an account 
of that experience, to be found for such as care to look it up* 
in our Proceedings. 1 Governor Chamberlain had two years 
before become a member of our Society ; but, with failing 
health, he could not face the rigor of our northern winters, 
and had sought escape by going to Columbia. I exchanged 
letters with him in regard to the invitation to speak at Charles- 
ton, and he had strongly advised me to accept. In the course 
of our correspondence he referred to his life at Columbia and 
those he there associated with, and especially to one he de- 
scribed as " once his worst enemy, but now his best friend." 
Some instinct told me he meant Haskell; and, surely enough, 
1 2 Proceedings, vol. xvii. pp. 90-116. 


a few days later, when, on December 27, 1902, I found myself 
in Columbia, I next met Chamberlain before Haskell's hospi- 
table fireside. They had grown to know each other, to respect 
each other. Their relations were more than merely friendly. 
Creditable to both, they were especially so to Chamberlain. 

It was consequently no cause for great surprise to me that, 
a few days since, and after Chamberlain's death, I got a letter 
from Colonel Haskell referring to that event, in which I found 
this expression : — " He [ Chamberlain ] passed through an 
eventful career, and, showing ability at every step, showed 
also by his steady advancement in integrity of thought what 
was the eminent trait w T hich raised him finally to high moral 
rank. I am glad I knew him in his latter years." 

And now comes the sequel to my story. Recalling what 
had occurred in the years long gone, I felt moved to write to 
Haskell asking him, in view of this occasion and my announce- 
ment here of Chamberlain's death, if he would not prepare 
for my use an account, from his point of view, of what had 
taken place between him and Chamberlain in the long-ago 
reconstruction days. I told him it was all ancient history now, 
and, as such, I would like to put it on record. Somewhat to 
my surprise, — for his health was poor, — and greatly to my 
satisfaction, he complied with my request ; and, two days ago, 
I received by mail the extremely interesting paper I now pro- 
pose to read ; for, creditable both to the writer and to him of 
whom he wrote, it is the redeeming last page of a dismal 
record : — 

" My professional acquaintance with Mr. Chamberlain began 
during his term as Attorney-General of South Carolina, 1868- 
1872. I was opposed to him in several cases, — one of consid- 
erable importance. He was elected Governor in 1874 ; his 
administration was marked by great improvement over those 
which had preceded him, but he was hampered by the Legis- 
lature, and by many who had been, and still were, his political 
associates. This was specially marked in the election of two 
of the most objectionable characters in the State as Judges. 
The Governor denounced the action of the General Assembly, 
and refused to issue commissions, thus keeping these men out 
of office. For this he had the gratitude of the people of the 
State. He rendered other great services, among which was 


the adjustment of the State bond debt, which he effected 
through a settlement with the bondholders. Late in '75, or 
early in '76, he appointed a Board to scrutinize and pass on 
money claims against the State, of which there were many, 
fraudulent and otherwise, outstanding. He requested me, as 
a representative of the other party, to serve on said Board. 
After some hesitation I assumed the duty ; but, early in 1876, 
the political agitation having begun, I practically withdrew; 
later I was removed. In 1876 Governor Chamberlain was a 
candidate for re-election ; and, accepting as a reformer, had at 
first the support of most of the press and of nearly all the 
recognized leaders of the Democrats, or white people, of the 
State. A large portion of the people were, however, of a 
different mind. They had suffered, and been robbed and held 
down for years by the negro government, led and controlled 
by white men for the most part dishonest and unscrupulous, 
known as 'carpet baggers' and 'scalawags,' backed by the 
army and by the government of the United States. They had 
twice before been persuaded to attempt joint action and com- 
promise tickets, and been signally disappointed. Had the 
white people come out for this new reformer, his defeat by his 
own party was almost certain ; for he was a more genuine 
reformer, and more dangerous to them, than those who had 
preceded him. Moreover, had he been elected, he would have 
been bound by pledges and his party ties, — still wedded to the 
Utopian idea of a happy, peaceful and efficient government 
conducted by two races co-ordinate in political power and 
widely at variance in every other respect. The impossible ! 
Thus, when the ' straight-out ' ' home rule ' policy was an- 
nounced early in 1876, it was hailed by the people, though 
opposed by most of our prominent men as madness and folly. 
At the first Democratic convention held in May the ' straight- 
outs ' were in a minority, but strong enough to command 
respect ; and as all the members of the convention had but 
one purpose in view, — what was best for the State, — action 
was deferred to the August convention. Almost every man 
in the State prominent in political affairs had been already 
committed to the Chamberlain policy. The National Demo- 
cratic Executive Committee had adopted the same lines, and 
their agents were here at work ; but General Wade Hampton, 
before going to his plantation in Mississippi, had assured some 


of us that if the ' straight-out ' 4 home rule ' policy were 
adopted he would go into line, and fight with all the power 
that was in him. Few then conceived how great that power 
was, and what a leader he would make; but he was our only 
hope. On 28th June, 1876, the centennial of the Battle of 
Fort Moultrie was celebrated. Governor Chamberlain was 
the orator, and many thought his speech on that occasion had 
made his nomination certain ; but the people were not quieted, 
— their instinct told them it was all wrong, and unless those 
who were truly the State governed it, it would be better to 
live under military rule. The ' straight-outs ' carried the 
convention in August by a small majority, — three, I think. 
The vote was then made unanimous. Hampton had returned, 
and was a delegate from Richmond Count} r . I was chairman 
of the Executive Committee of that county, and was made 
chairman of the State Executive Committee, charged with 
the conduct of the campaign, to be begun in September [1876]. 
The action of our convention was a bitter disappointment to 
Governor Chamberlain ; but he got the Republican nomina- 
tion and went into the contest with great determination. 
Finally, as history shows, he appealed to the United States 
government, and induced the President [Grant] to declare 
that insurrection existed in South Carolina. He accordingly 
put us under martial law, and the State was again occupied 
by the army of the United States. The President's proclama- 
tion was issued on a Saturday in October, published on Sunday, 
and answered by our Committee in the New York 'Herald' 
of the next morning, — Monday. Our answer respectfully 
refutes the statements made by the President, and is sustained 
by the signed declaration of all the Judges of South Carolina, 
except the Chief Justice, — who corroborated our denial orally, 
but declined to put it in writing, — and except the colored 
Associate Justice, who was not asked. One Circuit Judge 
was absent from the State ; but on his return volunteered a 
like declaration. All Republican, they stated that, while the 
political struggle was earnest and intense, law and order pre- 
vailed throughout the State. 

"Prior to the above date, moved by the intensity of the 
struggle and grateful for the patriotic purpose which had 
marked his administration through the previous year, I went 
to see Governor Chamberlain privately, and had my sole inter- 


view with him. I urged him to retire from the contest, prof- 
fering to him the expression of the good will of the people 
of the State, and their appreciation of his efforts to do good 
during his administration. He seemed somewhat impressed, 
and said he would reflect on the matter. This was not known 
to the public, and I think has never been published. His 
answer, however, came to me very soon, in a bitter and viru- 
lent letter to the New York ' Tribune,' which I answered in 
the New York ' Herald.' From that time the fight was on 
to a finish. 

" We won on election day, carrying the State ticket by a 
small majority, — only a few hundreds. We lost the national 
ticket. The discrepancy was due to the fact that Republicans 
who were genuine citizens, and who were in business or had 
property here, voted our State ticket, but on the national ticket 
adhered to their party. 

" The situations, national and State, were very tense. In 
December the General Assembly convened. Hampton and 
Chamberlain each took the oath of office and declared himself 
Governor. The Election Board, being Republican, threw out 
enough of the Democratic members of the House to give the 
Republicans a majority. The armed forces of the national 
government sustained the rulings of the Board ; and, occu- 
pying the State House, refused entrance to the rejected mem- 
bers. The Democratic members then convened in a hall in 
the city, organized, having a majorit} 7 of the total number of 
the House, elected a Speaker and other officers, and com- 
municated with Governor Hampton. The Governor, having 
qualified by taking the oath of office, entered upon his duties, 
occupying the rooms of the State Executive Committee. 
Governor Chamberlain took the oath before the Republican 
members of the Assembly, and guarded by United States 
troops occupied the office in the State House. 

" The Democratic Lieutenant-Governor took charge of the 
Senate, of which he was by law the president. Thus we had 
one Senate, and two branches of the lower House. After two 
or three days of non-action but of intense feeling, the general 
commanding the United States soldiers removed the guards 
from the entrance door, but kept a strong force in the building. 
The Democratic members then marched in, and effected entrance 
to the legislative hall without violence. 


" The two Speakers sat side by side at the Speaker's desk. 
General Wallace for the straight-out whites, Mr. Mackey for 
the reconstructionists. The two parties occupied respectively 
the right and left of the hall. The situation was strained, and 
fraught with danger. The United States army was in the 
building and about it on every side, and sustained the recon- 
struction government. This gave undue confidence to the 
reconstructionists, and doubtless increased the peril for those of 
our side. For that reason I did all in my power to keep the 
peace. It was well known that I was opposed to violence, 
and that Hampton and the whole party sustained that posi- 
tion. It was known to most, too, that I never carried a con- 
cealed weapon, and disapproved of the practice. It was 
equally well known that we obeyed and meant to obey the 
United States government, and to offer no resistance to its 
army. These points could be established from incidents and 
declarations too many and too long for recital here. But we 
had called five thousand white men to the city of Columbia to 
protect our people from violence on the part of the radicals, 
and to keep the peace. Further, when the Democratic legis- 
lators w r ere carried into the hall and separated from outside, I 
distributed revolvers one to each member, and armed myself, 
wearing the pistols on a belt and open to view. It was a mis- 
take on the part of our Speaker to allow the radicals to enter 
after we had ' captured ' the hall, or to permit the ' Speaker ' 
of the radicals to take a seat on the stand. But he did both, 
and the situation had to be met. I therefore had food brought 
to the hall, and requested the members to hold to their posts 
day and night, which they did. I remained in person with 
them, sitting or standing behind the two Speakers. While in 
this position Mr. Mackey, the reconstructionist Speaker, asked 
me to step behind the curtain that he might speak to me. I 
assented. He then told me that they had a force of despe- 
radoes in the building ready to rush upon us, and he prayed 
that our people be removed to avoid the massacre, etc., etc. 
To which I answered, ' Mr. Mackey, if you suppose I am here 
for pleasure you are mistaken. I am here to keep the peace, 
and on this stand for the single purpose of killing you at the 
moment your " massacre " begins. I tell you further that I 
have six picked men detailed to kill you in the event I am 
killed before you are. Further, if the massacre occurs here, 


every officer of your side of the government, from the Governor 
down, will be killed. The men who will do it are good citi- 
zens and old soldiers who know their duty and will do it. We 
mean to keep the peace. You can now begin your " massacre " 
as soon as you please.' 

" That was the only case in which I made such a declaration 
in person to any of them ; and I told the truth. That was 
what, in my honest judgment, prevented bloodshed. Our 
people were not led by excitement, but by reason and patriot- 
ism, and they obeyed orders. 

" I mention in passing an incident. On the first day there 
was great anxiety in the throng at the State House, where 
both parties and the army were gathered, and anxiety was 
felt by many. Assassination of our leaders was threatened. 
One of my brothers, Colonel John C. Haskell, was present. He 
came to me and warned me to be careful, saying, ' I have for 
some time had my eye on a man who follows you everywhere 
and never takes his eye from you. He looks as if he means 
mischief.' 4 Show me the man,' I said. He pointed him out. 
4 John,' I said, 'be at rest about him. He is a discharged 
United States soldier who recently served out his term and is 
living here. He is a good and brave fellow. He came to me 
this morning, and asked the privilege of being my bodyguard, 
and I have seen him ever since watching faithfully.' I did 
not apprehend danger that day, but I could not deny the good 
fellow the privilege. 

" Under such conditions it was impossible to transact busi- 
ness; and after a day or two the Democratic legislature 
adjourned and went home. The vaults of the State House 
were closed and sealed. Governor Hampton, assuming control 
and receiving the taxes, ran the State government. Governor 
Chamberlain held his ground at the office in the State House, 
and awaited results. We were still under martial law, but 
the departments of government Were allowed to exercise their 
ordinary functions. 

[While these events were occurring in Columbia, the country 
at large, it will be remembered, was intent on the disputed 
Hayes-Tilden presidential contest. But little attention was 
then paid to what was going on locally in South Carolina, 
although the result in Washington also depended on the South 
Carolina electoral vote. That, however, was conceded to 


Hayes. Thus, having their vote cast for the candidate to 
whose election they were opposed, the people of South Caro- 
lina watched the course of events in Washington with breath- 
less interest ; for, on the national result, hinged the home result. 
If Tilden became President, the reconstruction epoch ended 
at once and of itself. It had come to its term. If, on the 
contrary, the Washington turmoil resulted in the presidency 
of Hayes, it would be by virtue of electoral votes secured 
through the returning-board machinery. Hayes was at last 
declared elected. The question in South Carolina then be- 
came local. Could the white man's ascendency be secured 
from the general wreck? All overt action was in abeyance, 
the opposing factions intently observing each the movements 
of the other pending developments in Washington. As chair- 
man of the Democratic State Executive Committee, Haskell's 
field of activity was now necessarily transferred to Washing- 
ton ; for, however the presidential contest might result, na- 
tional committals, one way or the other, must precede any 
final overt act at Columbia. Under these conditions Colonel 
Haskell's narrative thus proceeds:] 

" In January I went to Washington as representative of the 
* Hampton Government,' where I remained until the 4th of 
March, leaving Washington that night and returning to my 
State. I had repeated interviews with President Grant, and 
shall never forget his candor, and the consideration he gave to 
the statements submitted to him. He admitted frankly after 
patient hearing that he felt he had made a mistake in declar- 
ing that a state of insurrection existed, and consequently send- 
ing the United States forces to the State ; but that, as he had 
so done, and was about to go out of office, it was due to Mr. 
Hayes that any change of policy should be made by him. I had 
a brief interview with Mr. Hayes on Saturday night, 3rd of 
March, at Senator Sherman's residence. He declined to discuss 
questions in advance, but promised to give due consideration to 
all the circumstances when in office ; and I retired, feeling sure 
that he would act justly and fairly. Sunday morning I met the 
Hon. Stanley Matthews in the lobby at Wormley's Hotel, where 
we were both staying. I introduced myself; and, after a brief 
conversation, asked him to write a letter to Governor Chamber- 
lain, and give it to me. He at once consented, and wrote it then 
and there. After reading it I asked if I could show it to Mr. 



Evarts (afterwards Secretary of State), and he said < Certainly.' 
I sent up my card to Mr. Evarts, and in a few minutes was 
received. Introducing myself and my business, I handed him 
Mr. Matthews's letter, and asked him to write a letter of like 
tenor, and give it me. He at once complied. The purport of 
the letters was advice to come to Washington. With these 
letters in my pocket I went to the White House. The Presi- 
dent [Grant] was at lunch ; but I was ushered in, and he came 
out to meet me. Addressing him as ' Mr. President,' I stated 
that I had come to ask his advice whether it was necessary for 
me to remain longer in Washington. i Mr. Haskell,' he said, 
' let me correct the mistake you have made. I am no longer 
President. Mr. Hayes took the oath of office about an hour 
ago, just where you are standing. As to the other matter, I do 
not think it is necessary for you to remain.' I bade him 
good-bye, with heartfelt appreciation of the treatment I had 
uniformly received at his hands. I returned to Columbia, 
at once called on Governor Chamberlain and gave him the 
letters. Of course I had reported all to Governor Hampton, 
and acted with his approval. Chamberlain did not accept the 
suggestion, and remained at his post. After several weeks 
had elapsed, letters came from President Hayes, requesting 
Governor Hampton and Governor Chamberlain to come to 
Washington that he might confer with them. They both 
went. The result is known. Governor Hampton returned, 
and took charge of the office at the State House. The troops 
were removed, and things assumed a normal condition. 

" I now will state briefly how the personal relations between 
Chamberlain and myself grew up. Governor Chamberlain had 
left the State as above stated ; nor did he return for any length 
of time, until late in the 80's, when he came on professional 
business. I did not meet him ; but in 1890 he wrote me a 
letter. He said, in effect, that it might seem strange that he 
should write to one who had been so bitterly opposed to him 
in former years, but that his heart was still true to South 
Carolina, and that he could not refrain from expressing his 
approval of the political position I held in 1890. I answered, 
thanking him, and the matter closed. In the autumn of 1892 
I was in Philadelphia, and received two cards of invitation to 
a Democratic meeting at the Academy of Music, where an 
address would be delivered in support of Mr. Cleveland. I 


had a long day of business, and did not think of going ; but, 
strolling past the place after a late dinner, I recalled the occa- 
sion and went in. Chamberlain was speaking, — the name of 
the State to which I belong struck my ear as I entered the 
door, — I stopped, and stood and heard a tribute to the people 
of that State in the struggle of 1876 that made the heart thrill. 
'And before God,' he said in ending, 'they were right, and 
if I had it in my power to-day, I would not undo one thing 
they did that year. It was their State, and they had the 
right to govern it.' I do not say those were his exact words, 
but they have lived that way in my memory. At conclusion 
of the address I went to the side door, and, presenting my 
other card, was admitted ; but, being in travelling suit, stood 
at the entrance, while the speaker was receiving the congratu- 
lations of the distinguished group about him. All at once a 
gap was opened by chance. He saw me and threw up his 
hands, exclaiming, c You are the last man I expected to meet ! ' 
and, hastening forward, he shook hands with me. I responded, 
explaining my accidental presence, and telling him how deeply 
his generous and magnanimous tribute to the State of his 
adoption had touched my heart. After a few words more I 
bade him good-bye. 

" Some years had elapsed when I received a brief note from 
him saying he had read an article delivered before the Histor- 
ical Society assembled in New York by Miss Haskell of Rad- 
cliffe College, Harvard, and asked was the lady related to me, 
adding some agreeable comments. Replying, I told him that 
the young lady was one of my daughters, and I enclosed in 
another envelope an address I had delivered some time before, 
— sending it, I suppose, because perchance it bore on some 
remark he had made in his pleasant letter. I received an 
acknowledgment ; and, two days later, another letter saying 
he had read the address, and wished it could be read in every 
home in America. Years again had passed, when in the 
autumn (I think of 1900) I received a brief note from Cham- 
berlain telling me he was in Columbia, an ill man, at the hotel. 
He was utterly prostrated, and very feeble. He had recently 
lost his youngest son under distressing circumstances, and was 
heart-broken. From that hour until the end, the friendship 
became closer and closer. As his health improved, he gained 
heart and I saw a great deal of him. He spent several winters 


here, and was a constant visitor at my house. My family were 
fond of him, and it seemed almost as if he felt that it was 
'home.' You met him there in December, 1902, when you 
so kindly came to see me, at a time when tokens of friendship 
were specially dear. 

" During his subsequent and prolonged absence, and up to 
within a few days of the end, he kept up a correspondence 
with me. You were very dear to him, and he often referred 
to you in his letters. You are, from some points of view, more 
familiar with his character than I am ; but from other points 
of view I may know him better, and he has touched a chord 
with me by the manner in which he has borne the trials which 
came upon him. Born when the passions of prejudice were 
in their rapid growth, he was nurtured with them, as moral 
food, and entered the army when the bloody Civil War was 
raging. It would have been more than human to cast off the 
past in a moment, and to be a reformer in the party and against 
the principles which he had imbibed as gospel, before they had 
been tested by the lessons of experience ; — but he was endowed 
with high traits ; he was a patriot, he was a searcher after 
truth, and, when he believed it found, he was brave enough 
to declare it, without regard to danger or its inconsistency 
with his past. He loved his country, and was to the end loyal 
to the State of his adoption, and came to love the men who 
had crushed his highest hope in the zenith of his public life. 
He was a student, a worker, and a thinker; and when he dis- 
covered that he had dreamed of the impossible, he frankly said 
so, and defended the men who had opposed him. He was pure 
of heart and of a pure mind ; and in time he rose above the 
clouds. I remember him with love and respect." 

With this letter of a native-born and typical Carolinian 
bearing tribute to a " carpet-bag " Governor of his State, what 
I have to say on this occasion might appropriately close. I 
have, however, one word yet to add, and I add that word be- 
cause I feel that, could he be conscious of it, it would be 
most grateful to him of whom it is said. Two days after 
Chamberlain's death, on the morning of Monday, April 16th, 
a long and discriminating editorial article appeared in the col- 
umns of the Charleston " News and Courier." Of him the 
writer said : 


" Once the judgment of the country was rendered against him, [Mr. 
Chamberlain] never sought to reiustate himself as a political factor in 
the control of this State : but he never lost his interest in South Carolina 
and in the welfare of its people . . . though born in Massachusetts, 
and reared and educated in the New England school of thought, he was 
loyal to South Carolina in the broadest way until the end came to him. 

" Mr. Chamberlain was a very remarkable man. He was a scholar 
of the truest temper, a lover of his country of the broadest views, and 
at bottom he was always true, as we believe, to the highest welfare of 
his adopted State. New Englander by birth, he was a South Carolinian 
in spirit. . . . When he lay dying of an incurable malady his thoughts 
were with the white people of South Carolina in the great honor which 
they paid to his successful antagonist in the revolution of 1876. 1 We 
sincerely deplore his death." 

Mr. Edward H. Gilbert was appointed to write a memoir 
of Mr. Chamberlain for publication in the Proceedings. 

Mr. Josiah P. Quincy presented and read a letter from Gov- 
ernor Wise of Virginia relative to the approaching execution 
of John Brown. 

Richmond,V a , Nov r 16 th , 1859. 

My dear Sir, — Information from every quarter leads to the con- 
viction that there is an organized plan to harrass our whole slave-border 
at every point. Day is the very time to commit arson with best chance 
ag* detection. No light shines, nor smoke shows in daylight before the 
flame is off & up past putting out. The rascal too escapes best 
by day ; he sees best whether he is not seen, and best how to avoid 
persons pursuing. I tell you those Devils are trained in all the Indian 
arts of predatory war. They come, one by one, two by two, in open day, 
and make you stare that the thing be attempted as it was done. But on 
the days of execution what is to become of the borders ? Have you 
tho't of that ? 5 or 10,000 people flock in to Chastown & leave home- 
steads unguarded! What then but most burnings to take place? To 
prevent this you must get all your papers in Jeff: Berk: & Fred k & 
Morgan & Hamp : to beg the people to stay at home & keep guard. 
Again a promiscuous crowd of women & children would hinder troops 
terribly if an emeute of rescue be made ; and if our own people will only 
shoulder arms that day & keep thus distinct from strangers the guards 
may be prompt to arrest & punish any attempt. I have ordered 200 
minie muskets to be sent to Charlestown at once with fixed amt n and 
the Col s of Berkely, Jeff: & Fred: to order regt s to be ready at a 
moment. I shall order 400 men under arms. Then, ought there to 

1 Reference is here made to the equestrian statue of General Wade Hamp- 
ton, unveiled at Columbia, November 20, 1906. 


be more than one day of execution ? Judge P. ought to have thought 
of this, but he did n't. If O App ls dont decide before 2 nd Dec r I '11 hang 
Brown. If they do & sustain sentence will it not be best to postpone 
his ext n with the rest. He ought to be hung between two negroes & 
there ought n't to be two days of excitement. Again it gives Legis- 
lature the opportunity of uniting with Executive in hangiug Brown. 
Another question. Ought / to be there ? It might possibly be neces- 
sary in order to proc: M. law. Say to Co 1 Davis that I have ordered 
him to act as Commissary Gen 1 for all the troops in Jefferson and 
he must remain & act until we are through. The Gov r may pay out 
of contingent fund & I gave M r Brown the forms of U. S. army t' other 
day, shall of course call on Gen 1 Assembly for an appropriation the 
first week. The guards must be kept up until 16 th Dec r . Watch 
Harper's Ferry people. Watch, I say, and I thought watch when there. 
Gerritt Smith is a stark madman, no doubt! Gods, what a moral, what 
a lesson. Whom the Gods wish to make mad they first set to setting 
others to destroying. The Dementat comes after instead of prius in 
Abolition mania. Dont then present G. Smith. But do get an in- 
dictment ag* Howe & Fred Douglas & Sanborn, particularly for con- 
spiring to cause & actually causing murder &c. in Virginia. The 
difficulty will be as to the requisition. Look at clause in Constitution 
of U. S. It must be by Executive of the State from which he fed. 
Have him arrested there, and apply to Pres. U. States for removal to 
State wherein offence was committed. M r Hudnall has given me ver- 
bally his report. It is not completely full. Some papers he said you 
promised to return to people who furnished 'em. Dont do so. Send 'em 
all to me. Let me hear soon from you. Yrs. truly, 

Henry A. Wise. 
A. Hunter, Esq. 

Official envelope addressed : " To A. Hunter, Esq r . Charlestown. Jefferson 
Co. Va." 

Mr. Franklin B. Sanborn read extracts from a paper 
upon the life and career of Edward Gove, of Seabrook, New 

During the meeting remarks were made by the Hon. 
Samuel A. Green, and Messrs. J. F. Hunnewell, Charles 
P. Bowditch, William R. Thayer, and Franklin B. 



The stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 13th instant, 
at 12 o'clock M., the President in the chair. In the absence 
of the Recording Secretary, who was out of the State, Mr. 
Charles C. Smith was appointed Secretary pro tern. The 
record of the May meeting was read and approved. The Li- 
brarian, the Corresponding Secretary, and the Cabinet-Keeper 
submitted the customary reports. Among the gifts were an 
enlarged photographic portrait of the late Recording Secre- 
tary, Rev. Dr. Edward J. Young, given by his sons, and a large 
lithographic portrait of the late Rev. Dr. John T. Kirkland, 
for many years a member of the Society. 

Mr. William V. Kellen, of Boston, was elected a Resident 
Member, and M. J. J. Jusserand, Ambassador from France to 
the United States, was elected a Corresponding Member. 

It was 

Voted, That the stated meetings for July, August, and Sep- 
tember be omitted, the President and Recording Secretary to 
have authority to call a special meeting if necessary. 

The President announced that Mr. Charles C. Smith had 
resigned his office as editor of the Society's publications, and 
said that the Council would take the proper action thereon. 

The President reported back from the Council the amend- 
ments to the By-Laws which had been introduced at the last 
meeting, briefly explaining their purpose. The amendments 
were then adopted in the form printed on the notification for 
this meeting. 

An additional article is proposed in relation to the Treas- 
urer, to be numbered Article 1, Chapter VII., in the following 
form : 

Art. I. The Treasurer shall give bond to such amount as the 
Council shall from time to time prescribe for the proper performance 
of his duties, and to secure the Society from possible loss in connec- 
tion with the same. The cost of such bonding shall be paid by the 


Society. The Council shall further make such provision as may be 
reasonable and proper for payment of a book-keeper or accountant to 
aid the Treasurer and the Auditing Committee in the performance of 
his and their duties. 

The articles now n umbered 1 of Chapter VII., and 2 of 
Chapter VII., shall then be respectively numbered Articles 
2 and 3. 

Articles 5 and 6 of Chapter I. of the present By-Laws read 
as follows : 

Art. 5. Each Resident Member shall pay twenty-five dollars at the 
time of his admission, and ten dollars each first of January afterward, 
into the treasury of the Society, for its general purposes ; but any 
member shall be exempted from the annual payment if, at any time 
after his admission, he shall pay into the treasury one hundred and 
fifty dollars in addition to what he may before have paid ; and all 
commutation fees shall be funded by the Treasurer, and the interest 
only used for the current expenses of the Society. Eaeh Resident 
Member shall be entitled to receive a copy of all the regular publica- 
tions of the Society, issued after his election, without charge; and all 
members who have paid the commutation fee shall be entitled to the 
privilege of the Library, and to copies of the publications, for life, 
even should their membership cease by removal from the State or by 

Art. 6. If any person elected as a Resident Member shall neglect, 
for one year after being notified of his election, to pay his admission 
fee, his election shall be void ; and if any Resident Member shall 
neglect to pay his annual assessment for two years after it shall have 
become due and his attention shall have been called to this article in 
the By-Laws, he shall cease to be a member ; provided, however, it 
shall be in the power of the Treasurer, with the consent of the Presi- 
dent, to dispense (sub silentio) with the payment of the assessment, 
whenever, in any special instance, they may think it advisable to do so. 
Each person who shall be elected a Resident Member shall, when noti- 
fied of it, be furnished by the Corresponding Secretary with a copy of 
this Article and the preceding one. 

In view of the present financial condition of the Society, 
it is proposed to revoke both of these articles, substituting 
therefor the following : 

Art. 5. No entrance fee or annual payment shall be required of 
members, whether Resident, Corresponding, or Honorary, except such 


as may from time to time be imposed upon Resident Members by spe- 
cial vote of the Society. 

Art. 6. P^ach member shall be entitled to receive a copy of all the 
regular publications of the Society issued after his election without 

On motion of Mr. Thomas L. Livermore it was 

Voted, That, in view of the foregoing votes, the Council be 
directed and instructed to effect an equitable adjustment with 
such of the Society as have paid the commutation fee, repay- 
ing to said members from the General Fund a proportional 
amount of the sums received from them, they being credited 
with annual interest and being debited with the regular annual 
fee from the date when the commutation fees were severally 

Voted, That the Treasurer be authorized to make payment 
and settlement as above. 

The President then read the following paper; and at the 
proper point in his remarks a beautifully executed bust of Mr. 
Winthrop was unveiled. 

As the members of the Society then present will doubtless 
remember, fourteen months ago yesterday, and in presence of 
a somewhat notable assemblage composed of both sexes, the 
bust of James Savage, now before you, was unveiled. In the 
address then made, you will also remember, I spoke of two 
former Presidents of the Society, James Savage and Robert 
C. Winthrop, as standing out so prominently among those who 
had held the position that they constituted a class by them- 
selves. Their united occupation of this chair covered, in the 
first place, no less than two fifths of the Society's whole ex- 
istence ; for, beginning in 1841, it extended to 1885. Although 
last year's occasion was more especially devoted to a memorial 
of Mr. Savage, contributed by his daughter and only surviv- 
ing child, I then said that, while the years covered by the joint 
term of service of Mr. Savage and Mr. Winthrop constituted 
"our golden period," it was in Mr. Winthrop's time and through 
his efficient action that the great and memorable change in the 
Society took place. 

Our Annual Meeting of April last was the fifty-second since 
the presidency of Mr. Winthrop began ; and while in the 



original Dowse room the two portraits, that of Mr. Everett, by 
Stuart, and that of Mr. Dowse himself, with the Chantrey 
bust of Sir Walter Scott, made up the sum total of works of 
art, whether on canvas or in marble, it would unquestionably 
have been in accordance with the feelings of Mr. Dowse, that 
marble presentations of Mr. Savage and Mr. Winthrop should 
hold their places respectively on his either hand at the head of 
the chamber which bears his name. For obvious reasons, 
such an arrangement is, so far as concerns the Society, emi- 
nently fit and proper. Accordingly, it was a year ago so 
ordered. Nevertheless, I well remember, when the unveiling 
took place, and the two works of art were then brought into 
unavoidable comparison, how impressed I instantly felt with 
the superiority of the Savage bust over that of Mr. Winthrop. 
It is only proper to say that the Winthrop bust, the only one 
of him in the marble the Society then possessed, was never 
satisfactory to Mr. Winthrop himself. So much was it the 
reverse of satisfactory that it was well understood it had 
always been kept somewhere in the Tremont Street building 
where it was least likely to meet his view. Weak in design 
and execution, its failure both as a work of art and as respects 
portraiture was now made more apparent by contrast. There 
is about the Savage something distinctly classic — suggestive 
of the Roman. It is a head in enduring marble which one 
might naturally expect to come across at any moment while 
loitering in the great collections at the Vatican or in Naples. 
Strong, individual, and artistic, it gives the idea of both force 
and intellect in the original. With the bust of Mr. Win- 
throp it was otherwise; and yet, in the marble, we had no 

This did not satisfy; for to the members of the Council it 
seemed in every way proper as well as desirable that Mr. Win- 
throp also should be before us in this our room of meeting, 
not only in the stone, but in such form as to do justice to him, 
recalling to those of his time who still remain his living pres- 
ence. We felt we owed that to him ; for, a year ago, as I 
have already said, I referred to the term of Mr. Winthrop's 
presidency as the " golden period" in the records of the So- 
ciety. But in doing so I did but quote the exact words of my 
predecessor in this chair, Dr. Ellis, uttered on that day in 
April, 1885, when he himself took the seat Mr. Winthrop had 


then just vacated. 1 It is not too much to say that during those 
Winthrop years this Society was revolutionized ; it entered 
upon a new phase of existence. Prior to the election of Mr. 
Winthrop its membership was limited to sixty. The attendance 
at its meetings was small and indifferent; their surroundings, 
severely simple, were also unattractive. Those present found 
themselves in a small apartment, sitting upon settees arranged 
in ranks in front of the armchair — not this in which I now 
am — occupied by the President. My father had then for 
years been a member of the Society, and it was his wont to 
make a diary entry after each meeting he attended. Politically 
he was at the time bitterly opposed to Mr. Winthrop and to 
the great body of those composing the Society. His entries 
bear evident marks of the fact. He was of the dissatisfied. 
Nevertheless, after the May meeting of 1857, when Mr. Win- 
throp's long occupancy of the chair had hardly more than 
begun, I find the following frank admission : — " The impulse 
given to this institution by the events of last year is quite 
surprising. The attendance is always large, and the positive 
energy much more developed." The two memorable events 
marking this influence of Mr. Winthrop's individuality were 
the increase in the charter number of members, at the time by 
no means unopposed, from sixty to one hundred, and the 
gift to the Society of this Dowse room, in which its members 
could meet in suitable state. Both could be distinctly traced 
to Mr. Winthrop ; and this fact was recognized by the Com- 
mittee which, twenty-two years ago, nominated my immediate 
predecessor, and the successor to Mr. Winthrop. In its report 
for that year the Committee referred to said emphatically that 
to Mr. Winthrop's " devoted effort and untiring zeal more 
than to any other or to all causes combined is owing the 
growth of the Society in usefulness and in reputation. During 
the thirty years of his presidency it may truly be said that 
Mr. Winthrop has ever carried the Society with him both at 
home and abroad, and it is needless to add that nowhere has- 
it failed to be adequately represented." 2 It was, moreover, 
during Mr. Winthrop's presidency, and in fact coeval with its 
commencement, that the publication of our Proceedings was 
begun as a record of what took place at our meetings, distinct 
from the body of the Society's Collections. On the day when 

i 2 Proceedings, vol. ii. p. 84. 2 Ibid. 


Mr. Winthrop resigned, the twenty-first volume in that series 
was placed upon the table and distributed among the mem- 
bers. During Mr. Winthrop's period seventeen volumes were 
added to our printed body of Collections. On the day of his 
withdrawal from this chair, Mr. Winthrop observed that, of 
those who were members when he entered upon the presi- 
dency, ten only were among the living when he left it. 
During those thirty years the Society had been almost wholly 
renewed. He also then referred to the striking fact, to which 
I alluded myself fourteen months ago, that it was during his 
presidency that the roll of the Society shone with its most 
distinguished names. I then specified nearly a score of those 
then members of it, illustrative of the remarkable fecundity 
of the Winthrop period in historical literature as well as 

Three busts of Mr. Winthrop are known to have been 
taken. The first, and of the younger period, is that which 
heretofore has occupied the pedestal opposite that surmounted 
by the bust of Savage. The second was by Powers, taken in 
the year 1868, which is in the Harvard College library. The 
third, that now before us, is reproduced from a cast, probably 
also by Powers, which stood in the library of the late Charles 
Deane, and was given to the Society by his family when this 
building was opened for use. 

I have as yet been unable to ascertain the place of the 
original, if, indeed, it was put into stone. Nevertheless, its 
strength and resemblance are, as compared with the bust 
which preceded it, at once apparent. Taken altogether, it is 
not unworthy of him it represents, and bears comparison with 
the companion presentment of Mr. Savage. 

It is not pleasant to reflect how few of those now here are 
able from their own memories to bear witness to this fact. I 
have said that, at the close of the thirty years of Mr. Win- 
throp's presidency, the names of but ten of those who were 
members when he was first chosen remained upon our roll. 
Over a score of years have since run out ; and of the hundred 
names on the roll in April, 1855, twenty-two only remain on 
it still. In other words, probably not one in five of those here 
present remember Mr. Winthrop as he sat in this chair and 
presided at our meetings. It is, therefore, eminently proper 
that the testimony of these survivors should appear upon the 

1907.] cotton's farewell sermon. 101 

record, that the bust now about to be unveiled fitly represents 
to coming generations and in the everlasting marble one to 
whom the Society owes so much, and upon whose history and 
development he placed a mark at once deep, legible, lasting 
and beneficent. 

MiOEdwin D. Mead, having been called on, read the fol- 
lowing paper : 

John Cotton's Farewell Sermon to Winthrop's Company 
at Southampton. 

The First Church in Boston contains many tablets in mem- 
ory of men, both of the old time and the new, associated with 
its great history. Among those of the colonial days thus hon- 
ored are Sir Henry Vane, Anne Hutchinson, Simon and Anne 
Bradstreet, Governor Endecott, and Governor Leverett. The 
statue of Winthrop, when recently removed from Scollay 
Square, was fittingly placed beside the First Church. Within 
the church has just been placed the most beautiful and most 
important of its monuments, the recumbent marble statue of 
John Cotton, by Bela L. Pratt. In its pedestal of masonry, 
not yet completed, will be set a stone from the old St. 
Botolph's Church at Boston, in Lincolnshire, secured through 
the courtesy of the present vicar by the President of our 
Massachusetts Historical Society, who has altogether taken 
so important a part in the erection of this noteworthy memo- 
rial. The inscription which will be graved over it is from 
Mr. Adams's hand, and is as follows : 


Born in Derbyshire, England 

4 December 1585 

He died in the Colony of Massachusetts Bay 

23 December 1652 

Fellow of Emmanuel College, Cambridge 


Vicar of the Church of Saint Botolph 

Boston, Lincolnshire 


Regardless of Preferment and 

Conspicuous as a Puritan Divine 

He became the object of Prelatical Persecution 

" Unawed by influence and unbribed by gain " 

He then sought refuge in New England 

Ordained immediately on his arrival 

He ministered to his death as 

Teacher of the Boston Church 


- Scholar — Theologian — Preacher — Publicist ■ 

He gave form and inspiration to . 

The Ecclesiastical Policy known as 

" The New England Way " 

Preceptor and Friend of Vane 

From him Cromwell sought counsel 

Living, he was revered as 

" That Apostle of his Age" 

Dead, he is remembered as 

"Patriarch of the Massachusetts Theocracy" 

His Descendants in the Seventh and Eighth Generations 

Have erected this Memorial 



This gives in simple and impressive words the outlines of 
John Cotton's life. The erection of this beautiful memorial 
is a matter of public moment, and for it Boston is grateful. 
Half a century ago, a chapel in old St. Botolph's Church was 
restored by citizens of our Boston in memory of John Cotton, 
the inscription upon the memorial brass tablet being from the 
hand of Edward Everett. Phillips Brooks, a descendant of 
John Cotton, preached more than once in St. Botolph's pul- 
pit; and in the cloisters of our own Trinity Church there was 
placed, almost complete, the upper portion of the stone tracery 
of one of the old windows of St. Botolph's. It is intimated 
that when the new Episcopal cathedral is erected here, it may 
be a copy of the famous church from which John Cotton came 
to the First Church in Boston. All these things bring closer 
together the old Boston and the new. 

Several years ago, in 1894, 1 reprinted among the Old South 
Leaflets the farewell sermon which John Cotton preached to 
Winthrop's company at Southampton in 1630, on the eve of 
their sailing for New England. The circumstances of that 
farewell, and even the very existence of the sermon, have been 
strangely overlooked, and to most persons are unknown ; and 
our President has asked me to share with you the results of 
studies concerning the sermon, which to me have been so in- 
teresting. The placing of the memorial to John Cotton in the 
First Church makes this certainly a fitting time to consider 
an address of such cardinal importance by him, to the found- 
ers of Massachusetts, on as memorable an occasion. 

" God's Promise to his Plantation" is the title under which 
the sermon was published, the text, always so significant in 
the old Puritan sermons, being from 2 Samuel, vii, 10: "I 
will appoint a place for my people in Israel, and I will plant 
them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move 
no more." The sermon was published in London the same 
year. " Printed by William Jones for John Bellamy, and are 
to be sold at the three Golden Lyons by the Royal Exchange, 
1630" — such is the imprint on the first edition. Another 
edition was printed in London in 1634 ; and this was " Re- 
printed at Boston in New England, by Samuell Green ; and 
are to be sold by John Usher. Anno 1686." Like most of 
Cotton's other works, so precious to his generation in New 
England and so commanding in their influence, it then re- 

1907.] cotton's farewell sermon. 103 

mained long out of print ; and during the two centuries it 
so completely disappeared that only in rare historical col- 
lections are old copies to be found. The circumstances under 
which the sermon was delivered even became lost sight of by 
the historians, although they were so interesting. For this 
sermon by John Cotton holds the same place in relation to the 
Massachusetts colony which John Robinson's famous sermon 
at Delftshaven holds in relation to the Plymouth colony. It 
was the farewell sermon to Winthrop's company, as Robinson's 
sermon was the farewell to the Pilgrim Fathers. Yet the great 
historical significance of this sermon has been strangely over- 
looked. Robinson's words have become classic. They are 
quoted at every Forefathers' Day dinner. The theologians 
hold controversy as to what they meant ; the historians specu- 
late as to precisely how and when they were spoken ; and 
painters venture to conjure the scene. The sermon itself is 
not in our hands. Bradford even preserved no record of it 
for us. We simply have Edward Winslow's reminiscence of 
it, written down twenty-five years after it was delivered. Yet 
the address is famous, while Cotton's sermon is practically 
unknown. Cotton was in his day a far more famous and in- 
fluential man than Robinson. The departure of the Massa- 
chusetts colony from Southampton was an event which caused 
a sensation in England, whereas the Mayflower company was 
an obscure company whose sailing attracted slight attention. 
John Cotton, perhaps the leading Puritan minister in England 
at the time, went all the way from Old Boston to Southamp- 
ton to bid his friends godspeed and to preach this farewell 
sermon. The sermon was at once printed, was printed again 
and yet again, and lies in the libraries. Yet almost no man 
reads it, and even the historians seem to have forgotten that 
it was ever preached. 

Winslow's account of Robinson's sermon at Delftshaven is 
given in a communication which he addressed to the Earl of 
Warwick and the Commissioners of the Plantations, and which 
he printed in 1646, under the title of " Hypocrisie Unmasked," 
in reply to charges which Samuel Gorton had made against 
the colonies. He does not pretend to give the whole address, 
nor even the exact language. 

There is one point in Robinson's address which should be 
especially noted in connection with Cotton's advice to the 


Massachusetts people at Southampton. Said Robinson : " There 
will be no difference between the unconformable [Nonconform- 
ist] Ministers and you, when they come to the practise of the 
Ordinances out of the Kingdome : And so advised us by all 
meanes to endeavour to close with the godly party of the 
Kingdome of England, and rather to study union than divi- 
sion." This point is emphasized by Winslow, whose purpose 
in his whole plea, written " at the request of some well-willers 
to the peace and good agreement of the godly, so distracted 
at present about the settling of Church-government in the 
Kingdom of England,'' is to show both sides " what this poor 
despised Church of Christ now at New Plymouth in New 
England, but formerly at Leyden in Holland, was and is, how 
far they were and still are from separation from the Churches 
of Christ, especially those that are Reformed." Cotton, in his 
farewell sermon, said nothing about the relation of Noncon- 
formists, such as those whom he addressed were, to Separa- 
tists, such as the Plymouth people were popularly reputed to 
be ; but in another connection at Southampton he seems to 
have made this the subject of express counsel. This we learn 
from the letter of Samuel Fuller of the Plymouth colony to 
Bradford in 1630, preserved in Bradford's History at the 
proper place (see page 279), and also in completer form in 
Bradford's Letter-book (see Mass. Hist. Collections, iii. 75). 
Fuller was at that time visiting Winthrop's people, who had 
just arrived ; and, speaking of the entrance of Winthrop and 
others into church covenant, he says: u Here is a gentleman, 
one Mr. Cottington [Coddington], a Boston man, who told 
me that Mr. Cotton's charge at Hampton was, that they should 
take advice of them at Plymouth and should do nothing to 
offend them." He adds assurances of the warm feeling of the 
Massachusetts men toward those of Plymouth ; and Bradford, 
seeing in all a witness to the growing influence of the Plymouth 
principles, comments : "Thus out of smalle beginnings greater 
things have been prodused by his hand y* made all things of 
nothing, and gives being to all things that are ; and as one 
small candle may light a thousand, so y e light here kindled 
hath shone to many, yea in some sorte to our whole nation ; 
let y e glorious name of Jehova have all y e praise." And it is 
surely a notable thing that the followers of Winthrop, leaving 
England with the warmest protestations of love for the Church 

1907.] cotton's farewell sermon. 105 

of England as their mother, had hardly landed in New Eng- 
land before they separated themselves from the Church of 
England quite as completely as they of Plymouth ; and that 
John Cotton, whose farewell charge was that they should 
fellowship the Plymouth people, as Robinson's farewell charge 
was that these should study union with the Nonconformists, 
became in a few years the most eminent champion of Congre- 
gationalism in New England. 

John Cotton's position among the New England ministers 
and people during the twenty years (1633-1652) that he was 
teacher of the First Church in Boston was supreme. Professor 
Moses Coit Tyler, the most thorough student in our time of 
Cotton's life and work, has spoken of his ascendency as " more 
sovereign, probably, than any other American clergyman has 
ever reached." " He was the unmitred pope of a pope-hating 
commonwealth." He had held a most brilliant position in 
England before he came to share the hardships of this wilder- 
ness. He had had the highest reputation as a Cambridge 
scholar; and as rector of the famous St. Botolph's Church in 
Old Boston, had become renowned as one of the leading 
Puritan preachers in England. He was the revered friend and 
counsellor of Winthrop, Johnson, and many of the founders 
of the colony, not a few of whom had been his parishioners. 
The persecution which he suffered when Laud became primate 
in 1633 gave him new honor in the eyes of the Massachusetts 
people ; and his arrival in Boston in the autumn of that } r ear, 
and his immediate installation in the principal pulpit of the 
little town, was a notable event in the history of the colony. 
Some of the old writers say — perhaps without warrant — that 
Boston had been named Boston as a compliment and perhaps 
an invitation to him : " with respect to Mr. Cotton," are Hub- 
bard's words, where he tells of the naming of the town. From 
the hour of his coming till his death, " lie wielded with strong 
and brilliant mastership the fierce theocracy of New England. 
Laymen and clergymen alike recognized his supremacy, and 
rejoiced in it." u I hold myself not worthy to wipe his slip- 
pers," said Nathaniel Ward. Roger Williams wrote that some 
people in Massachusetts " could hardly believe that God would 
suffer Mr. Cotton to err." Hubbard says that whatever John 
Cotton " delivered in the pulpit was soon put into an order of 
court, or set up as a practice in the church." When he died, 



he was given, Mather tells us, a the most grievous and solemn 
funeral that was ever known perhaps upon the American 
strand " ; and it was commonly believed that the heavens 
themselves took note of the event. " About the time of his 
sickness," says Nathaniel Morton, " there appeared in the 
heavens over New England a comet giving a dim light, and 
so waxed dimmer and dimmer until it became quite extinct 
and went out ; which time of its being extinct was soon after 
the time of the period of his life : it being a very signal testi- 
mony that God had then removed a bright star, a burning and 
a shining light out of the heaven of his church here, unto 
celestial glory above." 

I do not propose here to speak in general of Cotton's life. 
Its significant chapters — his brilliant university career, the 
long ministry at Old Boston, the persecution, the flight, the 
powerful influence here as preacher and as author, the Roger 
Williams controversy, the Anne Hutchinson controversy — are 
well known. His life was written by his friend, Samuel Whit- 
ing, the minister of Lynn, by Cotton Mather, his grandson, 
and by John Norton, his successor, and has been written by 
more modern men, although we have not to-day any adequate 
biography or critical study of the man and his writings and 
his unique influence in New England. He has almost never 
been the subject of articles in the magazines and reviews. 
Francis Parkman wrote upon him in the North American 
Review for 1834: but the article is not an important one. 
Far more important is the article by Rev. George E. Ellis, in 
the International Review for 1880, on u John Cotton in Church 
and State." The lecture on Cotton, given by Rev. John Cot- 
ton Brooks, in the Old South course on the Founders of New 
England, in 1891, was published in the New England Maga- 
zine, with many illustrations, constituting probably the best 
popular account of the life and work of the great minister of 

Cotton was a voluminous writer, the author, it is said, of 
nearly fifty books, all of which were sent to London for pub- 
lication. A list of his principal works may be seen in Rev. 
William Emerson's "History of the First Church in Boston," 
page 85, in the Prince Library Catalogue, prepared by Justin 
Winsor, and in the valuable chapter on Cotton in Professor 
Tyler's " History of American Literature." Cotton Mather 

1907.] cotton's farewell sermon. 107 

says that he " was indeed a most universal scholar, and a liv- 
ing system of the liberal arts, and a walking library " ; and 
this is sufficiently apparent from the range of his published 
works. His "Way of the Churches of Christ in New Ensr- 
land" is one of the ablest seventeenth-century expositions of 
Congregationalism ; the influence of its cardinal ideas upon 
Vane, who during his stay in Boston lived for a time under 
Cotton's roof, and upon the men of Cromwell's army, is brought 
out in such books as Borgeaud's " Rise of Modern Democracy 
in England and New England." His " Keys of the Kingdom 
of Heaven " expounds his theocratic ideas of government. His 
" Milk for Babes, drawn out of the Breasts of both Testaments, 
chiefly for the Spiritual Nourishment of Boston Babes in either 
England, but may be of use for any Children," was a famous 
catechism in its day, and was translated for the Indians. His 
" Bloody Tenent Washed and Made White in the Blood of the 
Lamb " is his principal work in opposition to Roger Williams. 

It is extraordinary that such a man, held in such esteem, 
should have preached such a sermon as that which we here 
consider, on such an occasion, going from Boston to South- 
ampton to do it, and that the fact should have passed unno- 
ticed by his biographers and by all the chroniclers of his much 
writing and bewritten generation, and should have remained 
unnoticed in all the later popular histories, finding mention 
simply in two or three obscure antiquarian notes. Whiting, 
Mather, Norton, and McClure, Cotton's biographers, do not 
even mention this farewell visit to the Massachusetts company 
at Southampton. Mather was aware of the sermon's existence, 
but he merely names it in his list of Cotton's published works : 
" There are also of his abroad sermons on the thirteenth of 
the Revelations, and on the vials, and on Rev. xx, 5, 6, and 
2 Sam. vii., last in quarto." McClure even assigns the sermon 
to the period of Cotton's residence in Boston. The reading of 
the sermon itself should have prevented such a mistake, as its 
character is apparent. McClure was doubtless misled by the 
date, 1634, of the London edition from which the American 
edition was reprinted. But this was not the first London 
edition. There is a copy of the 1630 edition in the library of 
the Massachusetts Historical Society, as there are doubtless 
copies in other collections. 

Johnson, Hubbard, Neal, Hutchinson, Barry, Palfrey — in 


none of these historians of Massachusetts do we find Cotton's 
farewell sermon noticed; nor in Bancroft and the general his- 
tories of the United States. Palfrey, in his glance at Cotton's 
earlier career, at the point where he notices his arrival in Bos- 
ton, observes that " at the departure of Winthrop's colony, he 
made a journey to take leave of them at Southampton " ; and 
in a note he refers, as his authority for the statement, to Scot- 
tow, with whose "Narrative" Barry also shows himself ac- 
quainted. But nowhere do the farewell sermon and the 
memorable occasion of its delivery, of which Scottow gives 
explicit information, receive any attention. 

We naturally turn to Winthrop's Journal as the contempo- 
rary writing in which we should chiefly expect mention of 
Cotton's visit to Southampton and the farewell sermon. But 
when the Journal opens, " Anno Domini, 1630, March 29, 
Easter Monday," the Governor is already "riding at the Cowes, 
near the Isle of Wight, in the Arbella " ; and the sermon had 
probably been preached at Southampton just before that date, 
before the embarkation. If it was preached after the em- 
barkation, it is still possible, of course, that it might not have 
found mention, as the famous farewell address to their breth- 
ren of the Church of England, drawn up by the company, a 
week or more after that, while anchored at Yarmouth, does 
not find mention ; but undoubtedly the sermon was preached 
before the Journal opens. In Winthrop's letters from South- 
ampton, however, we should certainly expect reference to this 
matter. Cotton was Winthrop's friend, and there was probably 
no other minister in England whom he held in such reverence. 
Cotton had probably paid a visit to the Groton home only four 
months before. On November 24, 1629, Winthrop writes from 
London to his wife : " It may be Mr. Cotton of Boston will 
come see thee on thursdaye or fridaye. Gett him to stay a 
night if thou canst," No person in England could have come 
to Southampton to bid him and his company godspeed whose 
coming would have meant more. Yet there is no reference 
whatever to it in any word of Winthrop's which has come 
down to us. 

This strange omission is remarked upon by Robert C. Win- 
throp in his life of the Governor. " In neither of the letters 
from Southampton," he says, "is there any allusion to the 
presence of John Cotton, or to the sermon which he is said 

1907.] cotton's farewell sermon. 109 

to have preached there ; but such an omission is by no means 
conclusive evidence that Winthrop was not among the edified 
listeners to that memorable discourse. His letters from there 
are very brief; and he says, as an excuse for not writing more 
fully, ' Here I meet with so much company and business, as I 
am forced to borrow of my sleep for this.' And so we will 
still trust that his heart was encouraged by hearing the faith- 
ful minister of Old Boston, who was so soon to become his 
companion and pastor in New Boston, deliver 'God's Prom- 
ise to his Plantation,' and follow it with his prayers and 

Referring to Scottow's " Narrative " as the principal author- 
ity for the statement that the sermon was delivered before the 
Massachusetts company at Southampton, Mr. Winthrop calls 
attention to the contemporaneous testimony, which so far as I 
know has been noticed by him alone, found in the following 
passage from the Diary of John Rous, a Suffolk man, under 
date of 1630 : " Some little while since, the Company went to 
New England under Mr. Winthrop. Mr. Cotton, of Boston 
in Lincolnshire, went to their departure about Gravesend, & 
preached to them, as we heare, out of 2 Samuel, vii, 10. It is 
said that he is prohibited fro preaching any more in England 
than until June 24 next now coming." 1 

With reference to this mention of Gravesend as the place 
where the sermon was preached, it is to be said that the ships 
for the expedition were fitted out at London, and probably 
lay for some time in the Thames. Many of the company may 
have congregated there and embarked before the vessels pro- 
ceeded to Southampton, where Winthrop and others went on 
board. It would have been quite possible, therefore, for all we 
know to the contrary, that such a sermon should have been 
preached to a gathering of the colonists at Gravesend. But 
Fuller's reference to u Mr. Cotton s charge at Hampton " con- 
firms Scottow's statement that it was at Southampton that 
Cotton parted from the company and preached his farewell 
sermon. The citation from Rous's Diary does have some value 
as indicating that Cotton was already under close watch, and 
that there may have been reasons why there should not have 
been much said about his sermon at that time in England ; 

1 Diary of John Rous, Camden Society's Publications, No. 66, pp 53, 54. 


although in view of what we know of him during the next 
two years, and the fact of the immediate publication of this 
sermon in London, we cannot attach great significance to this. 
Mr. Winthrop and Charles Deane are the only ones of our 
historical writers whom I have found making any considerable 
reference to Cotton's sermon, both drawing upon Scottow's 
" Narrative," although Mr. Deane, when he published his first 
critical note upon the sermon, had evidently not observed 
Scottow's own exact words upon the subject, but discovered 
them after his note was printed. His two notes were pub- 
lished in the New England Historical and Genealogical Regis- 
ter, vol. h\, April and July, 1848, pp. 151 and 318, under the 
title of " God's Promise to his Plantation." I give them both 
here, as being the only critical discussions of this notable 
address which I have been able to find : 

I. " The first printed works relating to the settlement of the Massa- 
chusetts Colony appeared in 1630. 1 Among them are the ' Planter's 
Plea,' 'New England Plantation,' and ' God's Promise to his Planta- 
tion.' The first is supposed to have been written by Rev. John White 
of Dorchester, England, who early manifested a great interest in the 
settlement of this colony. It is interesting and valuable, as it gives a 
minute account of the first commencement of the plantation. It is 
supposed to have been printed soon after the sailing of Winthrop's 
fleet. The second is a letter written from Salem to his friends in 
England, by Rev. Francis Higginson, who arrived here in June, 1629, 
with Mr. Skelton. It gives his experience of the country after a resi- 
dence of about three months. There were three editions printed in 
1630, the first of which is supposed to have appeared before the sailing 
of Winthrop's fleet. The last-named publication, which tells its own 
story in the title-page we have given above, is interesting, not as a 
historical document, but for the associations with which it is connected. 
It was preached shortly before the departure of Winthrop's company ; 2 
and perhaps in the celebrated St. Botolph's Church, of which he was 
rector for many years. 8 Some of his parishioners were about leaving 
him for a distant and almost unknown colony ; but his heart was with 
them and their enterprise. No undertaking was attempted in those 
days without ' proving it by the touchstone of God's word.' And 

1 " There is a slight allusion, however, to this colony in Smith's Virginia, 
ed. 1629. i 

2 " Thomson's History of Boston, England." 

3 " It is uncertain whether this sermon was preached at Boston or at South- 
ampton. We know he did preach a farewell sermon at the latter place." — 
Scottow's Narrative, Prince's Annals. 


Cotton here draws largely from the Old Testament (from which our 
fathers drew the most of their theology as well as jurisprudence), in 
order to show what God has promised to his faithful people. I will 
appoint a place for my people Israel, etc. The preface to this discourse, 
' To the Christian Reader,' was written by another hand, with initials 
I. H., and in our own copy we find the following query penned some 
few years since : ' May it not have been John Humphry, who was 
one of the six original patentees from the council of Plymouth?' 
Humphrey was chosen deputy governor with the view of coming over 
this year, but being prevented, Mr. Dudley was elected in his place. 
The writer of the preface says, ' Now because many may either not 
know, or doe not consider upon how full a ground and warrant out of 
the word of God that undertaking (which was the occasion of this ser- 
mon) hath hitherto proceeded, I thought good (courteous Reader), 
leave being with some difficulty obtained of the Reverend Author, to 
present unto thy view and consideration that which may in part give 
thee satisfaction in this particular. Ere long (if God will) thou shalt 
see a longer declaration of the first rise & ends of this enterprise, & so 
cleare & full a justification of this designe, and also in respect of any 
other ground and circumstance of weight/ &c. This discourse is 
worthy of note as being the first printed work of which we have any 
record, of one who bore so prominent a part in the early period of the 
Massachusetts settlement. When we reflect that Cotton transferred 
his labors from Boston in Old England to Boston in New England, 
and that the latter was named in honor of him and his associates and 
friends who came from the former, and consider also the occasion on 
which this sermon was delivered, it will appear by no means insignificant 
or uninteresting. Its contents are by no means remarkable. As we said 
above, it possesses nothing historical. But it does contain some most 
excellent advice and exhibits the true principles which animated our 
Puritan Fathers. We give below a few extracts from it — to introduce 
which we have trespassed thus far." [Here follow extracts from the 

II. " Since writing the notice of this sermon in the last number of 
the Register, I have met with the following MS. notes of Prince, the 
chronologist, in his own copy of this discourse now before me : ' By 
several passages in the sermon, it seems to be preached in England to 
a number of people about to remove to New England, and considering 
the history of his life, 1 and that he went to the Isle of Wight in Eng- 

1 " ' Here is a gentleman, one Mr. Cottington [Coddington] a Boston man : 
who told me that Mr. Cotton's charge at Hampton was that they should take advice 
of them at Plymouth and should do nothing to offend them.' 

"'By this only passage in Govr. Bradford's MS. History, we find that the 
Revd. and Famous Mr. Cotton went from Boston in Lincolnshire, to take his 


land, in the spring of 1630, to see Govr. Winslow [he means Win- 
throp], Mr. Wilson and company, and take his farewell of them, as 
they were then bound for New England, it seems highly likely that he 
then preached this sermon to them. 

'" After I had wrote the above,' he continues, 'I found in Joshua 
Scottoway Esq.'s narrative, that Mr. Cotton preached this sermon to 
Govr. Winthrop and company at the Isle of Wight, as they were pre- 
paring to sail for New England.' 

" I give below the passages from Scottow referred to. Prince, how- 
ever, should have put Southampton for the Isle of Wight. 

" ' Some of their choice friends, as the Reverend Mr. Cotton and 
others, went along with them from Boston in Lincolnshire to South- 
ampton, where they parted and he preached his farewell sermon. 

" ' Not long after this, Mr. Cotton's farewell sermon (above men- 
tioned) was printed at London, and since reprinted at Boston, entituled, 
God's Promise to his Plantation, wherein he exhorted them to remem- 
ber England, their mother, and that they should not be like those un- 
grateful birds, who when they had swum over a stream or river, forgot 
the wing that had hatcht them.' 

"If Scottow is to be relied on, — and we have no reason to question 
his authority, as he was for a long period contemporary with many of 
Winthrop's company, and dedicates his book, referred to, to Bradstreet, 
then living, who also came over with Winthrop, — then the question 
would seem to be settled as to the place where this sermon was 
preached, namely, at Southampton." 

Seottow's " Narrative " thus appears to be the sole distinct 
original authority concerning the delivery of Cotton's farewell 
sermon at Southampton. Joshua Scottow was an old man 
when he published his dolorous Jeremiad in 1694 ; but it is 
a clear and vigorous document, and there is no ground for 
questioning any of its statements of fact. Of the " Narra- 
tive " as a whole it is impossible to speak here ; but it might 
well form a theme for special treatment, as it is so little 
known, and as it mentions incidentally many matters of his- 
torical interest besides Cotton's farewell sermon. Incidentally, 
I say, for Seottow's primary purpose was not to write history, 
but to wail. He felt, after the fashion of gra}'-haired men from 
the beginning who have looked back mournfully to the " good 
old times," that New England was going to perdition ; and he 
contrasts the time of the saintly Cotton and the rest with the 

leave of his departing friends at South Hampton.' " — Prince's Annals, vol. i. 
p. 245. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. iii. p. 75. 


ungodly present, for the sake of prophesying a still more dis- 
astrous decline. The title-page of his pamphlet indicates so 
well the character of his work that I give its contents : 

(t A Narrative of the Planting of the Massachusetts Colony Anno 
1628. With the Lord's Signal Presence the First Thirty* Years. 
Also a Caution from New England's Apostle, the great Cotton, how to 
Escape the Calamity, which might befall them or their Posterity. And 
Confirmed by the Evangelist Norton. With Prognostics from the 
famous Dr. Owen, concerning the Fate of these Churches, and Ani- 
madversions upon the Anger of God, in sending of Evil Angels amono- 
us. Published by Old Planters, the Authors of the Old Men's Tears. 
Psalm 78, 2, 3, 4. / will utter dark sayings of old, which we have 
heard and known and our Fathers have told us, fyc. Jer. 6, 16. Thus 
saith the Lord, stand ye in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths, 
where is the good way, fy walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your 
souls ; but they said, we will not walk herein. Boston Printed and sold 
by Benjamin Harris, at the sign of the Bible over against the Blew- 
Anchor: 1694." 

The entire work was reprinted in the Massachusetts His- 
torical Society's Collections, fourth series, vol. iv., 1858. In 
the fourth volume of the second series, 1816, there is a brief 
memoir of Scottow — I think by James Savage. u The first 
mention of Joshua Scottow, traced by my inquiries," says the 
biographer, u is in the records of the Old Church, in the tenth 
page of which it is noted that, 4 Thomas Scottowe and Joshua 
Scottowe, the sonnes of our sister Thomasine Scottowe,' were 
admitted members on the 19th of the third month, 1639. . . . 
He was probably the younger son, and brought from England 
by his mother, a widow, admitted of the same church, 21 Sep- 
tember, 1634. He was well entitled, therefore, sixty years 
after, to call himself an Old Planter." He became a merchant 
" of much respectability," whose name frequently occurs in 
the affairs of the town. In 1691, three years before the pub- 
lication of the " Narrative," he published another pamphlet, 
which like its successor was a lament over the degeneracy of 
the times. It was entitled : " Old Men's Tears for their own 
Declension, mixed with Fears of their and Posterities further 
falling off from New England's Primitive Constitution." 
Cotton's sermon as published in London was prefixed by an 
address "to the Christian Reader," signed by " I. H." — prob- 
ably meaning, says Prince, John Humphrey. Humphrey, of 



whom Winthrop speaks as "a gentleman of special parts, 
of learning and activity, and a godly man." was one of the 
leading men in the Massachusetts enterprise, but found it 
necessary to postpone his coming. The purpose of his ad- 
dress, as explained by Mr. Deane, was to bespeak kind con- 
sideration in England for the new plantation, to which Cotton's 
sermon related. 

The sermon itself is a typical Puritan sermon, well worth 
reading again after these two centuries and a half simply as 
such. The sermon bristles with texts. There are three on 
the title-page, besides the main text from Samuel; and every 
statement from beginning to end is fortified by appeal to 
Ezekiel xx. 6, or some clinching Scripture. The sermon be- 
gins with David's purpose to build God a house, and the bless- 
ings promised. The transition is easy to the blessings upon a 
plantation established by God's people. A consideration of 
the three ways in which God makes room for a people leads 
to some words on the rights of the natives of the soil to be 
occupied. Then proper reasons for emigration are discussed, 
— the gaining of knowledge, lawful commerce, the " liberty 
of the Ordinances," a better chance elsewhere. " Nature 
teacheth Bees to doe so, when as the hive is too full, they 
seeke abroad for new dwellings: So when the hive of the 
Common wealth is so full, that tradesmen cannot live one by 
another, but eate up one another, in this case it is lawfull to 
remove." So it is to escape certain evils, which are duly 
enumerated, or to carry on some work pointed out by God's 
providence. The latter part of the sermon is a charge to keep 
the plantation godly. He exhorts the departing colonists to 
" take rooting in the Ordinances," to be " not unmindful of 
our Jerusalem at home," to "offend not the poor natives," to 
" looke well to the plants that spring from you." " Goe forth," 
exclaims the preacher, in the finest passage in the sermon, 
" every man that goeth, with a publick spirit, looking not on 
your owne things onely, but also on the things of others. This 
care of universall helpfullnesse was the prosperity of the first 
Plantation of the Primitive church. Acts, 4, 32." The text 
referred to is that which declares that "the multitude of them 
that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said 
any of them that aught of the things which he possessed was 
his own ; but they had all things common." We cannot for- 


get here that declaration of the Plymouth Company : " We 
doe holde ourselves straitly tied to all care of each other's 
good, and of ye whole by every one and so mutually"; and 
Robinson's charge to the little band : " With your commone 
employments joyue commone affections truly bente upon ye 
generall good, avoyding as a deadly plague of your both com- 
mone and spetiall comfort all retiredness of minde for proper 
advantage . . . ; let every man represe in himself, and ye 
whol body in each person, as so many rebels against ye com- 
mone good, all private respects of men's selves, not sorting 
with ye generall convenience." The true communal spirit was 
with the fathers of New England at the beginning. 

Cotton's farewell sermon was not a great prophetic utterance, 
like Robinson's at Delftshaven ; but it was a notable sermon, 
preached by a great man on a memorable occasion. It is re- 
markable that the sermon should have been so completely for- 
gotten, and it is important to have attention recalled to it. 

The President read the following memorandum : 

At the last meeting of the Society our associate Mr. Long 
read an interesting paper suggested to him by a recent instal- 
ment of the forthcoming Memoirs of Mr. Schurz, in McCiure's 
Magazine. It related to Mr. Schurz's recollections of cer- 
tain incidents connected with his appointment to the Spanish 
mission, in the early days of Lincoln's administration. After 
Mr. Long had closed, it will be remembered, I gave certain 
recollections of my own, connected with the same incident, 
quite at variance with the narrative of Mr. Schurz. I spoke 
of having myself been in Washington at the time, and re- 
membering the incident referred to. My recollection was that 
Mr. Schurz had applied for the Prussian mission ; that his 
appointment had, for manifest reasons, been wholly out of the 
question ; that Mr. Seward, Secretary of State, had been placed 
in an embarrassing position in regard to it ; and that the mat- 
ter had been subsequently arranged, not altogether satisfac- 
torily to Mr. Schurz, by his appointment to Madrid. The 
information came from my father, then holding extremely 
confidential relations with Secretary Seward ; was contempo- 
raneous with the incident; and my recollection of the facts 
was distinct and vivid. I also said that I thought it not im- 


possible some reference to the incident would be found in the 
diary of my father, who was then a member of Congress. 

Curious on the subject, I have since examined the diary cov- 
ering the time referred to. My so doing supplies another illus- 
tration of the utter worthlessness of memory, as a basis of 
history, when dealing with incidents long past. It recalls 
vividly the valuable as well as curious and entertaining paper 
once read here by our late associate Mr. Edward L. Pierce 
on this subject, and also my own subsequent comments on that 
paper, both now forming a part of our Proceedings. 1 

Recurring, however, to the diary of my father, I find the 
following entry, under date of Sunday, 10th March, 1861. 
He begins his record by mentioning a call paid the morning 
of that day on an elderly female relative, long a resident of 
Washington. He goes on to say that he found her " full of 
the gossip of the town about Mr. and Mrs. Lincoln, who are 
doing multitudes of strange things, in the midst of a popula- 
tion little disposed to favor. Mr. Sumner came to dine with 
us. He gives curious accounts of the errors on a larger scale. 
The difficulty with Mr. Lincoln is that he has no conception of 
his situation ; and, having no system in his composition, he 
has undertaken to manage the whole thing as if he knew all 
about it. The first evidence of this is to be found in his direct 
interference in the removal of clerks in the Department ; the 
second, in his nomination of persons suggested by domestic 

" In the evening we had visits from Governor Seward and 
his son and daughter, and from Mr. Eliot. Governor Seward 
asked a private conversation, in which he communicated to 
me the leading events in his relations with the President. He 
explained his own views of the policy to be adopted in foreign 
affairs, and the utter absence of any acquaintance with the 
subject in the chief. And as to men, he was more blind and 
unsettled than as to measures. The nomination of Mr. Judd, 
and a German named Kreischman for his secretary, to Berlin, 
were made without consultation, merely in fulfilment of a 
promise to give the former a cabinet appointment, from which 
he had been compelled to give way. As to the mission to 
England, Mr. Seward had pointed out the necessity now ex- 
isting to give it a high character, and had named me as a fit- 

1 2 Proceedings, vol. x. pp. 473-490 ; vol. xiii. pp. 177-197 ; vol. xvii. pp. 1 440-448. 


ting person; but he delicately gave me to understand that it 
was received with no favor. On the other hand, Mr. Schurz 
had pressed the President so hard to go to Sardinia that he 
had been obliged freely to state the objections to his nomina- 
tion ; and, greatly to his surprise, early the next morning Mr. 
Schurz called upon him, and soon let him know that he had 
been made the master of his most confidential communications. 
This had compelled him to a frank and decided conversation 
with Mr. Schurz, which ended with his consent to withdraw 
himself. And the President declared himself greatly relieved 
at this interference of his Secretary." 

On the 15th Mr. Adams left Washington for Boston. On 
the 18th his nomination to the English mission was sent to 
the Senate. 

It thus appears I was entirety wrong in my recollections as 
to Mr. Schurz's desire at that time to get an appointment to 
Berlin, though in other respects my recollection was substan- 
tially correct. It will further be observed that my father's 
record is much more creditable to both Mr. Schurz and to Mr. 
Seward than that supplied b}^ Mr. Schurz from memory in his 
printed Memoirs. It also gives a somewhat vivid idea of the 
utter confusion and lack of system which prevailed in Wash- 
ington during the first month of the Lincoln administration. 

The President communicated by title a copy of a private 
letter from Lieutenant-Colonel James Savage to his father, the 
Hon. James Savage : 

This letter was written by James Savage, Jr., to his father, 
Hon. James Savage, formerly President of this Society. It is 
from a copy of the original made by Mrs. W. B. Rogers, the 
sister of the writer and the only surviving daughter of Mr. 
Savage. There is a Life of James Savage, Jr., by Mrs. Rogers 
in the Harvard Memorial Biographies (vol. i. p. 305). The 
operations described in the letter relate to the part borne by 
the Second Regiment of Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry 
during the campaign conducted by the Confederate General 
"Stonewall" Jackson against the Union Army commanded 
by Major-General N. P. Banks, in the Valley of the Shenan- 
doah, during the months of May and June, 1862. A fuller 
and more critical narrative of this famous campaign as a 


whole will be found in Lieutenant-Colonel G. F. R. Hender- 
son's Life of " Stonewall" Jackson (vol. i. pp. 304-356). The 
special part played in it by the Second Massachusetts Infantry 
has also been described by General George H. Gordon, the 
first colonel of the regiment, in his volume entitled " Brook 
Farm to Cedar Mountain " (pp. 175-261), and also in his 
" Third Paper " on the History of the Second Massachusetts 
Infantry. Other correspondence relating to the same events 
will be found in the Letters of C. F. Morse, also of the Sec- 
ond Massachusetts, and subsequently its commanding officer 
(Privately Printed, 1898), and in the "Life and Letters of 
Wilder Dwight" (Boston, 1891), who was Major of the 
regiment at the time in question, and a little later on, Sep- 
tember 17, 1862, was mortally wounded at Antietam, holding 
then the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel. The writer of the letter, 
James Savage, Jr., was, at the time of writing, Captain of Com- 
pany D ; he was, as Major, severely wounded in the battle at 
Cedar Mountain, August 9, 1862, and died at Charlottesville, 
Virginia, October 22 following. He then held the rank of 
Lieutenant-Colonel in succession to Dwight. 

Williamsport, Md., May 28th, 1862. 
My dear Father, — At midnight on Friday in our camp at Stras- 
burg, we were roused from sleep and lay waiting marching orders until 
eight o'clock the next morning, when we got rumors of the attack at 
Front Royal and of the defeat of Kenly's Maryland regiment. The 
fighting force of our brigade was 2100 men, that of Donnelly's rather 
less. Our brigade was composed of the 2nd Mass., the 3rd Wisconsin, 
the 29th Penn. and the 27 Ind. Donnelly's brigade contained the 5th 
Conn., 28th N. Y. and 46th Penn. ; on the march from Strasburg Don- 
nelly's brigade led, and of ours the 27th Ind. had the rear. I think it 
was near Middletown that the enemy first made an attempt to cut off 
part of our column, and they harassed us occasionally firing shell until we 
had passed through Newtown. Just beyond this place a halt was made 
and the 2nd ordered to the rear to relieve the 27th Ind. Our en- 
deavor was to gain time for the purpose of saving our immense wagon 
train, which consisted not only of the Division and brigade trains, and 
those of the several Regiments, but also of the Hospital. It was rain- 
ing in the morning when we started, but towards noon the pike be- 
came excessively dusty, owing in great measure to the droves of beef 
cattle and of condemned horses which were driven every now and then 
through our column, making much confusion in the ranks. When the 


2nd was ordered to the rear, we were deployed as a battalion of skir- 
mishers, and in that order marched back through the street of Newtown 
with supports of sections of Best's and Hampton's batteries on either 
side the town. My command was the reserve of three or four com- 
panies which advanced through the main street until the enemy's shell 
opened on us, when Col. Andrews 1 ordered us to break to the right and 
follow up through the gardens, sheltering ourselves as much as possible 
behind the houses. There was considerable spattering of fragments of 
shell for the next ten minutes, as we clashed through broad fences and 
palings of the yards, and then finding that the attention of the enemy's 
guns was diverted to our batteries and that we could not keep at the 
proper distance from the skirmishers, we came out again on the main 
street, and passed along the sidewalk, getting what shelter we could 
from the house fronts. We held Newtown for nearly two hours, keep- 
ing the enemy in check beyond the town. It was getting quite dark 
when, returning to the column, we reached the field where we had de- 
posited our knapsacks, for we had marched to the rear, and here our 
regiment again made a stand, and were attacked by a considerable 
force of the enemy. While my company with I. and G. were slinging 
their knapsacks, the firing was quite heavy, and was principally sus- 
tained by Co's A. and C, one platoon of each being deployed in the 
fields on each side of the road, and the two remaining platoons acting 
as reserve on the road ; these were under command of our gallant 
Major, 2 and behaved splendidly. The skirmishers had constantly to 
rally to resist charges of cavalry, and just after my men joined them 
with their knapsacks there was a close and heavy clattering of hoofs 

1 George L. Andrews was born in Bridgewater August 31, 1828, studied in the 
schools of his native town, and afterward at West Point, where he graduated in 
1851 at the head of his class. He was afterward engaged in the military ser- 
vice, and for two years as a civil engineer. In May, 1861, he was commissioned 
Lieutenant-Colonel of the Second Massachusetts Volunteers. At the time of the 
retreat of Banks in the Shenandoah Valley, he was in command of the regiment- 
He was made a Brigadier-General in November, 1862, and was brevetted Major- 
General in March, 1865. See Quint's Record of the Second Massachusetts In- 
fantry, pp. 476, 477 ; Appleton's Cyclopaedia of American Biography, vol. i- 
p. 75. — Eds. 

2 Wilder Dwight was born in Springfield April 23, 1833; his early education 
was partly at Phillips Exeter Academy and partly at a private military school at 
West Point. He graduated with high rank at Harvard College in 1853, and 
at the Law School two years afterward. In 1856 he was admitted to the bar, 
and soon became a partner of the late Chief Justice Gray. In May, 1861, he was 
appointed Major of the Second Massachusetts Volunteers. He was taken prisoner 
at Winchester May 25, 1862; and in the following month was made Lieutenant- 
Colonel. He was mortally wounded near Sharpsburg, Maryland, September 17, 
1862, and died two days later at Boonesborough. See Harvard Memorial Biogra- 
phies, vol. i. pp. 271-293 ; Brown's Harvard University in the War, p. 65. — 


heard in our rear, and down the hill they came upon us. The platoon 
on either side the road formed square suddenly, and also the re- 
maining platoons of A. and C. in the road, and together gave them a 
concentrated volley at about sixty yards distance, which effectually 
prevented them from trying that again during the night. Then came 
a sharp fire of muskets in which perhaps a dozen of our men fell killed 
and wounded and which was returned with effect. I was here ordered 
to throw out my company right and left of the road as flankers, and 
just as my first platoon, which was with me on the right side of the road, 
had climbed the fence the enemy threw in a volley which would have 
done harm to the platoon had we not struck upon a friendly stone wall 
behind which my men lay. The N. Y. cavalry, which was with us, 
thereupon went off at a gallop and reporting the 2nd cut to pieces was 
not seen by us again that night. From that time, just after dark, until 
twelve o'clock. I, with my first platoon as flankers, marched through the 
fields a hundred paces to the right of the column. During this time 
there was no firing. We kept as nearly opposite the centre of the 
column as we could guess. We passed mostly through wheat fields, 
the wheat growing stout and up to our waists and full of water ; it was 
so high that we could not see where we were stepping. I was near 
being disabled by striking my knee against a concealed stump and at 
one time several of us fell flat into a ditch. The reserve, which kept 
well in front, broke gaps in the fences to let us through. About mid- 
night the column halted at a house to find means of forwarding our 
wounded. We lost about an hour here, and the enemy coming up with 
us and pouring in a sharp fire compelled us to retreat double quick, 
leaving our Surgeon, Dr. Leland, 1 and the wounded in the house. In 
about three quarters of an hour we bivouacked just in the outskirts of 
Winchester, where we stacked arms, and I sat awake and shivered till 
daylight, having lost my servant who had my blankets and overcoat. 
The sun was just rising when our pickets were driven in and the ene- 
my's artillery opened on us from the high ridge back of Winchester. 
We were called to arms, and I, without food the day before except a 
cracker and none that morning, headed the column of the 2d, which 
advanced across the fields and up the hillside till we were halted and 
ordered to lie down under a stone wall. I with my right company was 
thus brought to the crest of the hill, and was at once ordered to deploy 

1 Francis Leland, M.D., was born in Sherborn, Massachusetts. December 24, 
1517, graduated at Brown University in 1838, and from the Harvard Medical 
School in 1842. He was appointed surgeon of the Second Massachusetts Volun- 
teers in October, 1861, and having been wounded in the service at Cedar 
Mountain resigned on account of impaired health in October, 1862. He died at 
Somerville October 5, 1867. Quint's Record of the Second Massachusetts In- 
fantry, pp. 478, 479, Historical Catalogue of Brown University, p. 177. — Eds. 


it back across the ridge to disturb a battery and parts of two regiments 
of infantry which had the shelter of a stone wall on the rid^e about 150 
yards distant. A section of one of our batteries had meantime begun 
to fire on them from a prominence 100 yds. back of me. The excite- 
ment was splendid and the chances for a good shot from our rifles 
capital at that distance. Twice we compelled the battery to seek shel- 
ter below the ridge, and some six or eight horses were sent dashino- 
away riderless. For a time they threw canister at us, but with little 
effect, and finding they met with no success in dislodging us, they turned 
their attention principally on the battery behind us, occasionally giving 
us a shell or so as a reminder. After about half an hour of this, in 
which my only casualties were two men very slightly wounded, I was 
reinforced by Co. G., Capt. Cary, 1 and ordered to cross the field in front 
and get the shelter of a stone wall beyond. It seemed a fearful thing, 
but as it was done at the double quick and the men were deployed and 
not in closed ranks, I believe no man was struck. Of course it was but 
the work of a moment, and we found ourselves with a better shelter, a 
good stone wall. Here we began to get an idea of what was in store 
for us. In our last position we bad seen and reported to the Col. a 
force of Infantry and Cavalry on a hill a mile to our right stealing 
round us, and here over our wall of square blocks of limestone we found 
three regiments of Infantry coming close upon our right flank. As 
they crept round the slope below us, our marksmen did what they could 
to check them. Sergeant Crocker struck down the colors of one regi- 
ment and Sergeant Miller knocked over a color corporal of the same. 
Having reported this approach, I was told to harass them as much as 
possible and to hold out as long as I could. The battery in front find- 
ing canister of no avail against our shelter now threw a few solid shot 
at the wall ; one struck it near the top fortunately, but scattering the 
fragments of stone violently, taking nearly the whole of one poor fel- 
low's head off, wounding another in the ankle, and allowing Capt. Cary 
and Sergeant Parker to escape almost by a miracle. 

Soon after we were ordered to fall back on the regiment, which we 
did in good time. We now saw the Penn. and Indiana regiments 
coming up the hill in two columns marching by the flank. They had 
scarcely reached the summit when the rebels were on the hill and close 
upon them. They opened their fire at close quarters upon each other, 

1 Richard Cary was the youngest child of Hon. Thomas G. Cary, and was 
born in Boston June 27, 1825. He was educated at the Boston Latin School, but 
did not enter college. Having decided to pursue a mercantile life, he spent some 
time at the South. On the breaking out of the war he returned to the North, 
and in May, 1861, was commissioned Captain in the Second Massachusetts Volun- 
teers. He was mortally wounded at Cedar Mountain, August 9, 1862, and died 
on the following day. See Quint's Record of the Second Massachusetts Infantry, 
p. 485. — Eds. 



though what the rebel force was then and there I could not say. I only 
know that the enemy fled down back of the hill in the utmost confusion. 
They were immediately reinforced and returned up the hill, and either 
the Indiana and Penn. regiments broke or a retreat was ordered, for 
they passed us ad went down the front slope towards the town double 
quick. This brought the enemy on our right flank, which meant Co. D. 
The order was given 4 'by companies right wheel." I wheeled my men 
to the front and dressed them. They stood as on parade. The inten- 
tion was to advance upon the enemy by column of companies, in which 
case Co. D. would have been first annihilated. It was then seen that 
not a moment was to be lost if the regiment was to escape being made 
prisoners. The order was, retreat. We turned amid a storm as of 
sheets of bullets and retired without firing a gun down the hill. Be- 
sides the three regiments in our rear, there were lines advancing both 
on our left and right flanks. Five minutes later and we should have 
been lost. Most of my missing men must have fallen coming down the 
hill. The fire was terrible. The enemy covered the slopes and hill- 
side for about a mile left and right of us, yelling like fiends. They 
did not follow us closely into town, but kept up their fire and we halted 
and formed in good order in the first street, and then began our long 
march of 35 miles to Williamsport. You have heard of the dispropor- 
tion of forces ; 28 of their regiments were counted, there may have been 
others. Gordon 1 had information the night before that there were 
25,000 or 30,000 of them, and the number of regiments counted would 
have given them 22,000. High up on the hill fell Lakin, a private of 
mine, shot dead through the body, his brother, stopping to learn how 
much he was injured, has not since been seen. Private Orne I think 
did not get down the hill safely. What others fell before entering the 
town, I cannot say. On the hillside Private Peterson was struck in 
the neck by a shot which came out in front. It was tied up and he 
marched the whole way, and is now doing well in the hospital at Fred- 
erick. Sergeant Crocker was struck by a minie ball in the calf of his 

1 George Henry Gordon was born in Charlestown July 19, 1825, and graduated 
at the United States Military Academy in 1846. He immediately afterward 
entered the army, and served with distinction in the war with Mexico. He re- 
signed from the army in 1854, and graduated from the Harvard Law School in 
1856. In the following year he opened a law office in Boston. On the breaking 
out of the Civil War he was appointed Colonel of the Second Massachusetts 
Volunteers. In June, 1862, he was made a Brigadier-General, and in April, 
1865, a Major-General, having been actively engaged in service throughout the 
war. After the close of the war he returned to Boston, and resumed the prac- 
tice of the law. He died in Framingham August 30, 1886. At the time of the 
retreat from the Shenandoah Valley he was in command of a brigade. See 
Appleton's Cyclopaedia of American Biography, vol. ii. p. 685 ; Brown's Harvard 
University in the War, p. 332. — Eds. 


right leg, making a long, bad looking wound, but not hurting the bone. 
Cap. Mudge x and Lieut Crowninshield 2 were struck in the leg at nearly 
the same time. Mudge I helped along a little way as best I could, and 
the order coming " double quick " we were separated, he running along 
until some one got him a horse. Crowninshield and my Serjeant 
Crocker were both helped into an ambulance, and had their lives saved 
by it, by young Mclenan, surgeon in the Fifth Conn. The same splen- 
did fellow also gave his horse to my Lieut. Abbott, 3 when he was walk- 
ing along, tired out in Winchester, or he would have been among the 
missing. Over and through the fence as we emerged from town came 
the deadly gusts of bullets, and again and again the order was " double 
quick." I have no doubt many of us longed to be shot that we might 
rest, and as we dragged our weary limbs along nothing but the thought 
of the bayonets of a relentless foe kept us on our feet. When the com- 
mand came " double quick," and we had been gasping for breath while 
walking, and I saw the column move on quickly, I followed, I know not 
how. By the station house Sergeant Parker stopped, and laying off 
his equipments sat down, unable to move farther. I think he was not 
wounded and am hoping to hear of him as a prisoner. He was a noble 

1 Charles R. Mudge was the son of Enoch R. Mudge, and was born in the 
city of New York October 22, 1839. He was fitted for college at the private 
school of Mr. Thomas G. Bradford, in Boston, and entered Harvard College 
in the summer of 1856, graduating with his Class in 1860. He was commissioned 
as a Lieutenant in the Second Massachusetts Volunteers in May, 1861 ; promoted 
Captain in July; Major in November, 1862; Lieutenant-Colonel in June, 1863; 
killed at Gettysburg July 3, 1863. See Harvard Memorial Biographies, vol. ii. 
pp. 151-162 ; Brown's Harvard University in the War, p. 144. — Eds. 

2 Francis W. Crowninshield was the son of Edward A. Crowninshield. He 
was born in Boston May 12, 1843, and died in Albano, Italy, May 21, 1866, of 
disease contracted in the service. His school life at the Boston Latin School 
was interrupted by an absence of a year or two in Europe with his father. He 
entered Harvard College in July, 1860, but left in the following year, and in 
December was commissioned as a Lieutenant in the Second Massachusetts Vol- 
unteers. He was wounded at Winchester, and again at Antietam, and was pro- 
moted to a captaincy in March, 1863. At Gettysburg he was severely wounded, 
and in May, 1864, he was shot in the leg by a guerilla in Tennessee. But he 
participated in Sherman's march from Atlanta to the sea, and was not mustered 
out until July, 1865. See Harvard Memorial Biographies, vol. ii. pp. 456-460; 
Brown's Harvard University in the War, p. 205. — Eds. 

3 Edward Gardiner Abbott was the eldest son of Hon. Josiah G. Abbott, and 
was born in Lowell September 29, 1840. He was fitted for college at the 
Lowell High School, aud graduated at Harvard College in 1860. Immediately 
on graduating he began the study of the law with great zeal and industry and 
with high promise of success. He was commissioned a captain in the Second 
Massachusetts Volunteers May 24, 1861. After a brief service with distinction 
he was killed in the battle of Cedar Mountain August 9, 1862. See Harvard 
Memorial Biographies, vol. ii. pp. 82-96; Brown's Harvard University in the 
War, p. 134. — Eds. 


fellow and has done good work for me. The pursuit of infantry ceased 
soon after leaving town, and, except a few shells thrown at random and 
an occasional shot from the skirts of woods on our flanks, we were let 
alone. My mouth was dry like a sponge ; and about three miles out, I 
met Stephen Perkins 1 in a house by the road side over a bowl of pickled 
beets, the vinegar of which went to my soul. I did not learn of my 
Lieut. 's fate till late in the day, and thought him lost till I saw him jog- 
ging along in a horse cart he had pressed by the way. It was a small 
one and then contained six beside guns and equipments. Our brave 
Major was missing, but we hear to-day (Monday 2nd) that he is safe, 
a prisoner in Winchester. My Sergeant Thurston I fear was wounded 
and taken. Corporals Woodward, Cleves and Anderson and 10 pri- 
vates are still among the missing. Private Colvin was shot through 
the bowels, but lived until he reached Williamsport, and had only been 
dead ten minutes when I saw him. He is buried in the graveyard 
here. My company from its position suffered more than the others on 
Sunday. I myself did not get into our place of bivouac on Sunday 
night till half past ten, and then I crawled under a friendly blanket, and 
with an old boot for a pillow slept until we were called just before 
dawn, to cross the river. No food nor sleep the night before and a 
march of 25 miles, then a disastrous battle and a flight of 35 miles, and 
you see me pretty well used up. Now I am as well as ever after a 
week's rest, and we are all longing to enter Winchester again with fair 
chances allowed us. 

We are encamped in a beautiful oak grove not far from the river and 
have a most lovely country all about us. The weather grows warm 
to-day and we have had constant thunder the last day or two, suggestive 
of Lunenburg. 2 

From your son James. 

In the absence of Mr. Edward Stanwood, Mr. Smith com- 
municated for him by title the following paper: 

1 Stephen G. Perkins, eon of Stephen H. Perkins, was born in Boston Sep- 
tember 18, 1835, and received a careful preparatory education. He entered Har- 
vard College with the Class of 1855, but was obliged to leave it on account of 
the weakness of his eyes, and graduated with the Class of 1856. After graduating 
he spent a year in the Law School, and subsequently joined the Lawrence Scien- 
tific School. In July, 1861, he was commissioned as Second Lieutenant in the 
Second Massachusetts Volunteers, and in the following month was promoted 
First Lieutenant. He was killed shortly afterward in the battle of Cedar Moun- 
tain, August 9, 1862. See Harvard Memorial Biographies, vol. i. pp. 373-381 ; 
Brown's Harvard University in the War, p. 97. — Eds. 

2 During the latter years of his life Hon. James Savage spent his summers 
at Lunenburg. See 2 Proceedings, vol. xvi pp. 142, 143; vol. xx. pp. 240, 
241. — Eds. 


The Separation of Maine from Massachusetts. 

The claim of Massachusetts to jurisdiction over the terri- 
tory now constituting the State of Maine dates from the mid- 
dle of the seventeenth century. The long and not always 
peaceable controversy between the Massachusetts Colony and 
Ferdinando Gorges, grandson of the famous lord-proprietor 
Sir Ferdinando Gorges, which extended over the years from 
1652 to 1677, was ended by the sale of the patent and all the 
rights appertaining thereto for £1250. Gorges's patent cov- 
ered the whole of the territory of Maine. King Charles II. was 
displeased by the transfer, and some writers who have been 
more inclined to score a point in subsequent controversies 
between Maine and Massachusetts than to adhere to histori- 
cal fact have misrepresented the transaction ; but William- 
son, in his History of Maine, says that " the purchase was 
fair and open — made at the desire of the provincials them- 
selves, when they were driven to extremities by an Indian 
war, and when nearly all the assistance and protection they 
were receiving proceeded from Massachusetts." 

It is impossible to ascertain when the movement origi- 
nated for a separation of Maine from Massachusetts. No 
evidence has ever been presented, so far as I am aware, 
that a sentiment in favor of separation existed before the 
close of the Revolutionary War. It may be taken as prob- 
able that during that great struggle a suggestion of divis- 
ion would have found few people in Maine to support it. 
But a movement began and attained formidable proportions 
one year after the Treaty of Peace in 1783. The separation 
was not accomplished until thirty-six years later, in 1820. It 
is a singular fact that no full account of this movement, so 
important to two States of the Union, has ever been prepared. 
A brief account of the agitation which began in 1784 and 
came to an end in 1787, or later, is contained in a paper by 
Daniel Davis 1 in the fourth volume of the first series of the 
Collections of this Society. Mr. Davis was a member of 
the second convention in Portland, held in September, 1786. 
There was a revival of this movement in 1792, of which, I 
think, no account whatever has been published. For many 

1 Mr. Davis was a native of the District of Maine, born in 1762, died in 1835. 
He was elected a member of this Society in 1792. 


years after that time nothing was heard of a separation, 
but the agitation was renewed in 1815 and continued active 
until, by the wish of the Maine people, the consent of Massa- 
chusetts, and the act of Congress, the new State was organ- 
ized and admitted to the Union. Many partial accounts 
of the unsuccessful campaign of 1816 have been prepared, 
but none of the successful movement in 1819. Moreover, 
while as to these several attempts some writers have under- 
taken to represent the situation as it regards the senti- 
ments of the inhabitants of Maine, they have usually done 
so from a partisan point of view, and have not seen much 
below the surface. No one, so far as I can discover, has 
ever considered the question from the Massachusetts end, 
or taken pains to inquire how the people of this part of 
the State regarded the matter. It is with a purpose to 
study these two questions, the motives of the people of 
Maine, and the attitude of the people of the Common- 
wealth proper, that I have prepared this paper. In so 
doing it seems proper to present a connected history of the 
whole movement, although some of the matter is familiar, 
and a large part of it is to be found in published essays 
which are not accessible to the general reader. 

Beginning some time in the latter part of 1784, numerous 
addresses and communications appeared in the Falmouth 
(now Portland) " Gazette " upon the subject of a separation 
of u the three Eastern counties " of York, Cumberland, and 
Lincoln, comprising the entire territory of the District of 
Maine, from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The 
discussion was temperate. The advocates of separation in- 
dulged sparingly if at all in criticism or complaint of the 
treatment the District received from Massachusetts. They 
maintained that the District was naturally separated geo- 
graphically from Massachusetts, and that many hardships 
naturally resulted from the distance of the community from 
the capital. They were convinced that economy and con- 
venience demanded a separate government, which they felt 
competent to organize and to support. 

It was about a year after this agitation began when the 
first active step was taken to make it effective. The Fal- 
mouth "Gazette" of the 17th September and 1st October, 
1785, printed the following notice : 


" Agreeably to a request made and signed by a large and respectable 
number of persons to the printer of this ' Gazette/ the inhabitants of 
the three Counties of York, Cumberland, and Lincoln are hereby noti- 
fied that so many of them as are inclined or can conveniently attend, 
are requested to meet at the Meeting House of the Revd. Messrs. 
Smith and Deane in Falmouth on Wednesday, the fifth day of October 
next, to join in a conference then and there to be held on the proposal of 
having the said counties erected into a separate government; and, if it 
should be thought best, to form some plan for collecting the sentiments 
of the people on the subject and pursue some orderly and regular 
method of carrying the same into effect." 

In accordance with this notice thirty-three gentlemen as- 
sembled at the time and place mentioned, in numbers almost 
equally divided between the three counties. They organized 
by the choice of William Gorham as President and Stephen 
Longfellow as secretary. After the occasion which had called 
them together had been discussed and the movement justi- 
fied, it was voted that a committee of seven, of which Peleg 
Wadsworth was chairman, " should apply to the several 
towns and plantations in said counties, requesting them to 
send delegates to meet " at Falmouth on the first Wednesday 
in January, 1786, for the purpose of considering the expedi- 
ency of the separation proposed. 

This movement attracted the attention of the government 
of Massachusetts. By advice of the Council Governor James 
Bowdoin brought it to the notice of the General Court in his 
address on October 20, 1785. " There is another matter, 
gentlemen," he said, " essentially important to the well-being 
of the Commonwealth which claims your most serious atten- 
tion, and which, by the unanimous advice of the Council, I now 
lay before you. It refers to a design against the Common- 
wealth of very evil tendency, being calculated for the purpose 
of effecting the dismemberment of it. That design has been 
for some months evident by a great number of publications in 
the Falmouth ' Gazette ' calling upon the people of the Coun- 
ties of York, Cumberland, and Lincoln to assemble together 
for the purpose of separating themselves from the government 
of this Commonwealth and of withdrawing from the duty and 
allegiance they owe to it. In consequence of these calls about 
thirty persons, as I am informed, assembled on the 5th instant 
at the Meeting House in Falmouth, and voted to choose a com- 


mittee to draft a circular letter to the several towns and plan- 
tations in those three counties, requesting them to meet in 
convention by their delegates on the first Wednesday of 
January next to consider the expediency of the said counties 
being formed into a separate State. The duty I owe to the 
Commonwealth in general and to the people of those counties 
in particular, indispensably obliges me to lay this matter before 
you, that you may take such measures regarding it as your 
regard for the collective body of the Commonwealth shall 

The reply of the General Court was, as usual, an echo of the 
address. It declared " that attempts. by individuals, or bodies 
of men, to dismember the State are fraught with improprie- 
ties and danger." The matter was not allowed to rest there, 
for the journal of the House of Representatives for November 
11 mentions a report of the committee to which the above 
passage from the governor's address was referred, presented 
by Mr. Baker of Worcester, recommending " that a committee 
of both Houses be appointed to bring in a bill declaratory of 
the allegiance which all the inhabitants of the territory of the 
Commonwealth of Massachusetts owe to the government of the 
same agreeably to the Constitution, and descriptive of those 
(particulars) 1 [acts and proceedings] which shall amount to a 
renunciation of allegiance, and so constructed as most effec- 
tively to secure the Commonwealth against the ill consequences 
of any (dismemberment whatever) [attempts to dismember 
the same]." The report was amended and adopted. The 
Senate members of the committee appointed in accordance 
with the recommendation were John Sprague and John Lowell. 
The journals of the two Houses do not make it appear that the 
committee ever reported. 

Notwithstanding executive and legislative disapproval, the 
convention was held on January 4, 1786. A committee of 
nine members was appointed to prepare a statement of the 
evils and grievances under which the people of the District 
labored, and an estimate of the cost of a separate government 
as compared with the amount the people of Maine paid to 
Massachusetts. The grievances reported by the committee 
were nine in number : (1) that the interests of the two com- 
munities were different, and that Massachusetts did not under- 

1 Original report in parenthesis, amendments in brackets. 


stand, and therefore could not promote, those of Maine ; (2 and 
3) the distance of the seat of government, and the consequent 
inconveniences ; (4) the expense of obtaining justice, since all 
the records of the Supreme Court were kept in Boston ; (5) 
the unjust and unequal operation of the regulations of trade, 
which depressed the price of lumber, the chief industry of 
Maine ; (6) the denial of representation in the House of Rep- 
resentatives to " a great part of the inhabitants in these coun- 
ties ; : (7, 8, and 9) an unjust system of taxation of polls and 
estates, an undue burden by reason of the excise and import 
acts, and the unequal incidence of the tax on deeds, on account 
of the smaller value of land conveyed and its more frequent 
conveyance. No definite estimate and comparison of the 
expense of a separate government seemed possible to the 

The convention ordered the report, signed by the president, 
to be sent to every town and plantation in the District, ap- 
pointed another convention to be held on the first Wednesday 
in September, and sent a request to each town to choose 
delegates to the convention at the March meetings. The 
first convention having adjourned until September, and the 
second convention consisting of delegates chosen in March, 
met at the same time, and as many of the persons were 
members of both, they coalesced, and chose the same officers 
as the January convention. But they numbered only thirty- 
one in all. Four towns in York, eight in Cumberland, and 
ten in Lincoln were represented in this convention. The 
number of towns and plantations authorized to send delegates 
was more than ninety. 

It was resolved by the convention that the people were 
suffering from the grievances enumerated by the former con- 
vention, except the fifth, relating to the operation of trade 
regulations. The phrasing of some of the paragraphs was 
slightly changed by a committee to which the subject was 
referred, with a request that any other grievances that oc- 
curred to them should be mentioned. As to the latter part 
of the duty the committee reported that there were such 
grievances, but they could not at that time " undertake to 

i No town having less than 150 ratable polls could send a representative, save 
that any town incorporated before 1780 might elect a member. A large part of the 
population were in plantations and districts not organized. 



enumerate the multiplicity of them." A committee was ap- 
pointed to prepare a memorial to the General Court asking 
for separation, and an address to the towns on the subject, 
requesting them to take a vote on the question and to return 
the numbers for and against the proposition. In order to 
secure a large vote it was resolved that the towns be informed 
that if they did not vote " they will be considered as ac- 
quiescing in the Doings of their brethren." The convention 
then adjourned until the last Wednesday in January, 1787. 

Williamson says * that " the language of the address was 
courteous and well expressed." A copy of the address is 
among the broadsides preserved by this Society, and unfor- 
tunately neither does its wording coincide with the version 
given by Williamson, nor is his description of its language 
quite accurate. The following are sentences extracted from 
the document, which is addressed " Friends and Brethren " : 
" The expediency of this measure has engaged the attention 
of the Public for a long time — it has been considered, as it 
undoubtedly ought to be, a subject of great importance. 
Two conventions have had it before them, and have carefully 
attended to the arguments which have been offered on both 
sides of the question. . . . You feel yourselves distressed, 
and your distresses will increase until you legislate for your- 
selves. In this there is no great difficulty. Government is 
a very simple, easy thing. Mysteries in politicks are mere 
absurdities — invented intirely to gratify the ambition of 
princes and designing men — to aggrandize those who govern 
at the expense of those who are governed." 

The petition was really a calm and moderate statement 
of the position of the advocates of separation. 2 They call 
attention to the fact that on the adoption of the present 
constitution " they either approved of, or submitted to, the 
same, and have paid due obedience to the laws thereof." 
Having concisely set forth the reasons for desiring a separa- 
tion, they say: 

" And while they are taking this peaceful measure to obtain a redress 
of their great political evils, by asking a separation from the other part 
of the Commonwealth, they do not entertain an idea of throwing off the 

1 History of Maine, vol. ii. p. 526. 

2 In this case also Williamson has modified the language of the original 
document materially. 


weight of the publick debt, at this time laying on the Commonwealth 
at large, or to prevent the other part of the Commonwealth from having 
their just proportion of the unappropriated lands ; but, like friends and 
brethren, most ardently wish to have all matters adjusted upon the 
broadest basis of equity and fair dealing." 

A question arose whether the petition should be presented 
at once to the General Court then in session. It was first 
voted " that as there has been a number of respectable 
towns in the Counties of York, Cumberland, and Lincoln that 
have not yet certified to this convention their determination 
of a separate State, and as the Commonwealth in general 
is at this time in a perplexed state, and this convention 
being unwilling to do anything that shall seem to lay a 
greater burthen on the General Court, therefore it is the 
opinion of this convention to postpone petitioning for a sep- 
aration at present." Subsequently a long and acrimonious 
debate took place upon a motion to reconsider this vote, 
which was finally carried by 15 to 13, and a vote was 
passed to leave the petition with the committee, to be pre- 
sented or not at its discretion. The committee exercised that 
discretion by withholding the petition until 1788, more than 
two years. It was offered in 1788 and referred to a com- 
mittee which reported verbally on January 22, 1789, recom- 
mending that it lie on the table. A vote to that effect was 
adopted by the House of Representatives. 

The action of the convention by a narrow majority is a rev- 
elation of the temper of those who were most urgent for the 
separation. It cannot be fully understood without a consider- 
ation of the origin and growth of the movement as a popular 
movement. All accounts agree that at the beginning separation 
was a project that appealed to the fancy of the people rather as 
one that would add to the prominence, importance, and inde- 
pendence of the community than as an escape from oppression 
and other evils. When the agitation started, in 1784, we have 
the authority of Davis for saying — and he was a member of 
the September convention of 1786 and was acquainted with 
all the actors in the movement — that " clergymen, physicians, 
lawyers, and farmers seemed engaged in accelerating the event " 
and in pointing out the benefits that would ensue from separa- 
tion. Apparently there was little opposition, or that which 


existed did not make itself evident. But when tbe conventions 
were held, we have the same authority for the statement that 
" there was also a respectable number of opposers of the meas- 
ure." They were men in trade who feared that the change 
would be detrimental to their business, and particularly those 
who held office under Massachusetts who apprehended that 
they would lose their positions. Davis admits frankly that 
self-interest controlled the members of both factions. He does 
not intimate on which side of the question he should be ranged. 
My best conjecture is that at that time he favored separation, 
but that he was for a conservative course. At all events, he 
was evidently glad at the time he prepared his paper (1795) 
that the movement failed. 

The year 1786 was the year of Shays's Rebellion. At the 
very time the second convention was held the General Court 
of Massachusetts was in session, summoned by Governor 
Bowdoin, to take steps to overcome the rising rebellion in the 
western counties. The causes of disorder were real, and the 
grievances were genuine, although it was beyond the power of 
the government to afford relief without injustice. It could 
transfer but not remove the evils of the day. The people of 
Maine were suffering as greatly from the hard circumstances 
of the time as those who rose in insurrection. They were in a 
sullen mood. The impulse to adopt any remedy for evils which 
they felt, and which, as commonly happens, they ascribed to 
the government under which they lived, had possession of 
them. " They would," says Davis, " have thrown off the yoke 
of any government without remorse." In the debate on the 
presentation of the petition some of them employed " the lan- 
guage of genuine insurgents." Like the more active insurgents 
in the western counties, they wished for paper money, and for 
tender acts to relieve the scarcity of money. While, therefore, 
the conservatives urged forbearance toward the Common- 
wealth at a time when it was about to cope with armed 
enemies, the radicals urged action, on the theory that in the 
state of civil war already begun Massachusetts would not dare 
to refuse the demand for separation. 

It is not improbable, as is ingeniously suggested by Davis, 
that the success of the radicals saved Massachusetts from a 
second insurrection. He thinks that the hope of the conces- 
sion which the convention demanded satisfied the malcontents. 


They could not ask respectfully for a dismissal, and begin to 
fight for it before there had been time to act on the request. 
Massachusetts was too busy with Shays to attend to the desires 
of Maine, even if the petition had been presented ; and before 
the next session of the General Court began the rebellion had 
been suppressed and the opportunity to frighten the Common- 
wealth into a concession of its own dismemberment had 

It is interesting at this point to speculate upon what would 
have been the status of Maine if an act of separation had been 
passed at that time. The States were under the Articles of 
Confederation, but each of them was an independent, sovereign 
State. Massachusetts could have consented to the separation 
of Maine, and the act would have required no confirmation by 
any other power. But could the new State have demanded 
admission into the confederation? The articles provided that 
Canada might be admitted as of right, but no other colony 
without the vote of nine States. It is a nice question whether 
as a former part of the confederation it would have been en- 
titled to admission as of right, or would have come under the 
rule of being another " colony." But in any event it would 
have been in the power of Maine to assert its absolute inde- 
pendence, and to repudiate all control by Congress. 

The convention, having adopted the address to the people 
and the petition to the General Court, adjourned until the last 
Wednesday of January, 1787. At that time it met again and 
received the votes of the towns on the question of separation. 
There were then ninety-three towns and plantations. Thirty- 
two only made returns of votes, which aggregated 618 for 
separation, 352 against it. Another adjournment was had to 
the 5th of September, when it was again resolved to ''collect 
the sentiments " of the people, but no action in that direction 
was taken. There were five or six other adjournments, but 
the later meetings were attended by a steadily decreasing 
number of delegates. At the last meeting there were but 
three persons present, all from Portland. One of them was 
chosen president pro tempore, another as secretary, and the 
third moved that the convention adjourn. There was no one 
to second the motion, and so, says Davis, " the convention ex- 
pired, not only without a groan, but without a single mourner 
to weep over its remains.'' 


It was in September, 1788, that the convention came to its 
inglorious end. Meantime the agitation for separation had re- 
sulted in considerable benefits to the people of the District. 
The General Court exempted wild lands from taxation for ten 
years; modified the fee act so as to make it less onerous ; or- 
dered the construction of two roads which made a continuous 
thoroughfare from the head of the tide on the Kennebec River 
to Passamaquoddy Bay ; granted to every squatter on the 
public lands prior to 1784 one hundred acres of land on the 
payment of five dollars ; established a term of the Supreme 
Court, for the first time, at Pownalborough, now Wiscasset ; 
and incorporated Bovvdoin College. " By which conciliatory 
measures," says Williamson, from whose account of them I 
have made this summary, " the subject of Separation was 
rocked into a slumber from which it was not aroused for 
several years." 

It is strange that neither Williamson nor any other writer 
upon the separation movement whose account is extant, makes 
even a remote reference to a revival of the agitation less than 
three years after the convention came to an end. Yet the re- 
suscitated project led to direct action by the General Court in 
the direction desired by the advocates of separation, which 
was not the case with the original movement. 

An address to the people of Maine by u A Number of your 
Representatives" was published in March, 1791. It appears 
from the Journal of the House of Representatives that on 
February 19, 1791, Mr. Gardiner of Pownalborough " was 
charged with a message to the Senate to send down the pe- 
tition from sundry towns in the Province of Maine to be set 
off as a separate State." At the same sitting " the Hon. T. 
Dawes came down and said that the petition . . . was not 
on the files of the Senate." The subsequent history of the 
movement at that session of the General Court is given in 
the Address just mentioned: "The time draweth nigh, when 
ye must be, as the god of nature intended ye should be, a 
free, sovereign and independent State." It then recites 
that on the 22d of February the senators and representatives 
of the District met and voted " near four to one " that the 
sense of the District ought now to be taken on the propriety 
of separation, and agreed that the chairman, John Gardiner 
of Pownalborough, should on the next day move to take from 


the files the petition of 1786, and that the towns should be 
instructed to take a vote of the inhabitants on the question. 
Mr. Gardiner made the motion, but opposition developed, 
chiefly on the part of Boston, " whose united force was collected 
to oppose the wished- for notification." The ground of opposi- 
tion, as the address puts it, was " that to agree to the present 
motion and order such notification would be as absurd as it 
would be for a man wantonly and deliberately to cut off a limb 
from his own body." 

The debate continued until the close of the morning sitting. 
In the afternoon other business intervened and prevented action. 
Whereupon the Maine representatives " concluded that it was 
better, perhaps, to let the matter rest until your sentiments 
could be had in another way ; although they bad no doubt 
from the known candour, justice, and equity of the House but 
they should finally prevail in the motion if they should perse- 
vere." Accordingly, after briefly stating reasons for separation, 
they advise that an article be put into the warrant for the 
next town meeting in each town that the sense of the inhab- 
itants be taken, and that the number for and against be carefully 
noted and sent to Boston. 

The matter was not further mentioned at that session of 
the General Court, but the following is an entry in the 
Journal of the House of Representatives for June 14, 1791 : 

"A motion was made by John Gardiner, Esq., member from 
Pownalborough that the petition from a convention held at Portland 
for the separation of the eastern part of this Commonwealth be taken 
up, and the prayer thereof granted, which motion being recorded, the 
said petition was read. 

" Voted, That Mr. Gardiner have leave to file his instructions on 
the same subject from the inhabitants of Pownalborough with the 
said petition. 

" Ordered, That the further consideration of the said petition be 
referred to the next session of the General Court." 

The advocates of separation were persistent. There is no 
way of ascertaining what response was made to the request 
for votes by towns, contained in the address of March, 1791. 
Probably it was disappointing, for there is no record of any 
town or popular petitions. Some of the representatives 
from the District took up the matter and drafted and signed 


a petition. I quote again from the journal of the House of 
Representatives : 

February 1, 1792. "A petition from the Senators and Representa- 
tives from the Counties of York, Cumberland, Lincoln, Hancock, and 
Washington, 1 praying that the sense of the inhabitants of the District 
of Maine as to the separation of the said District from this Common- 
wealth. Read and committed to Mr. Jarvis, Mr. Henshaw, Mr. Jones 
of Boston, Mr. Bigelow and Mr. Foster." 

February 10. The House took up the report, as to the 
purport of which there is no record save that it is charac- 
terized in the index as " favorable," and postponed it to the 
next day. 

February 12. "The House proceeded to the further consideration 
of the report of the Committee on the petition of the senators and rep- 
resentatives of the District of Maine, and on motion whether a notifica- 
tion should issue to the District of Maine for ascertaining the sense of 
the inhabitants relative to a separation should be the first question, it 
was ordered accordingly, and after debate the further consideration was 
postponed till Monday." 

February 13. " The House proceeded to the further consideration 
of the question . . . and after debate it was determined in the affirma- 
tive. Number of votes 111, 81 in favor." 

The action of the legislature took the form of a resolve. 
The only entry in the Senate journal respecting it is in the 
proceedings of March 6, and it consists merely of the title 
of the resolve, and the words ''Read and concurred." The 
preamble of the resolve is as follows: 

" Whereas it has been represented to the legislature in a memorial 
signed by the Hon. Nath : Wales, Esq., and others, Senators and Rep- 
resentatives of the District of Maine, that the inhabitants of the 
Counties of York, Cumberland, Lincoln, Hancock and Washington 
contemplate the formation of a separate government, to consist of the 
counties aforesaid, with the consent of this Commonwealth, In order 
that the real sense of said inhabitants may be known on this important 

1 Hancock and Washington counties were established in 1789 by a division of 
Lincoln County. 


The resolve provided that the selectmen or other officers 
of towns, plantations, and districts were authorized and em- 
powered to call meetings and allow the people to vote on 
the question, on the first Monday of May. The officers 
were to make returns to the Secretary of the Common- 
wealth by the second Wednesday in June. The resolve was 
so drawn, it will be seen, as to give an opportunity for all 
citizens of the District to vote, even those who lived in 
little settlements that had not been organized as plantations. 
They evidently had that opportunity in fact, for returns 
were sent in from such communities as "the goar adjoining 
Lewiston," the " district adjoining Winslow," and the " West 
ponds district west of Sidney." In all eighty-nine returns 
were sent to the Secretary of the Commonwealth, but it 
does not appear that they were ever transmitted to the 
General Court. Nor is there anything to show that the 
rude returns, now yellow with time, preserved in the archives 
at the State House were ever tabulated until I undertook 
that task, out of pure curiosity, for of course the matter is 
of the slightest possible importance. The result perhaps 
supplies the reason why the returns were neglected. A 
majority of those who voted were opposed to separation. 
The aggregate was 2084 in favor and 2438 opposed. Of 
course in the face of that vote the advocates of separation 
could make no headway with the members of the General 
Court from the other parts of the Commonwealth. They 
had been defeated by the opposition of the people of York 
County, which lies nearest to Massachusetts proper, who 
suffered less than any others from their distance from Bos- 
ton. There were eighty-nine returns in all. Eighty-three 
of them gave a majority of 273 for separation. Six towns 
in York — Kittery, Wells, Arundel, Lebanon, Berwick, and 
San ford — gave but 12 votes in all for separation and 627 
against it. 

It was a decisive defeat, yet the advocates of "independ- 
ence " were not completely discouraged. In October, 1793, 
they called a convention in support of the measure, which 
was held in December. Fifteen towns only were represented. 
The convention recommended the holding of another con- 
vention in June, 1794, at which time representatives of four- 
teen towns and three plantations met in Portland. Interest 



in the movement was manifestly slight, and the conven- 
tion adjourned until October, when a resolution in favor 
of the creation of a new State was adopted ; but nothing 
came of it. 

Two or three petitions were presented to the General Court 
at its January session in 1797 and were referred to a committee, 
which reported a resolve providing for a vote in the towns and 
plantations of Maine, on the second Monday in May, to ascer- 
tain the disposition of the people as to separation. The com- 
mittee expressed no opinion upon the subject. A day or two 
later, on February 27, the matter was taken up in the Senate, 
and, so far as appears from the journal and the newspapers of 
the day, the resolve was passed without opposition or debate. 
On the 28th the House of Representatives also passed the re- 
solve, apparently with unanimity, and Governor Sam Adams 
approved it on March 2. The result of the vote is reported to 
have been adverse to separation, but I have not been able to 
ascertain the numbers. Nevertheless there seems to have been 
an impression — I am almost inclined to think it was a hope — 
on the part of public men in Massachusetts proper, that the 
movement was to succeed. For in a debate upon a pending 
bill for a radical change in the judicial system of the Common- 
wealth, it was argued that the reform was premature, " as it 
was probable a separation of the District of Maine would take 
place.'' i 

In 1803 the inhabitants of sixty towns in Maine petitioned 
for separation, but no action was taken at that time. On 
February 12, 1807, Mr. Gannett of Gardiner, a member of the 
House of Representatives, presented by leave a resolve provid- 
ing for a vote on the first Monday in April, upon the question 
whether the senators and representatives of the District should 
be instructed to petition the General Court for separation. 
The resolve was taken up in the House on the 14th, and was 
passed by that body, as also by the Senate on the 19th, with- 
out discussion or opposition. So little interest did the move- 
ment excite in Maine that the Portland "Argus" did not 
chronicle the vote nor refer in any way to the subject until 
March 12, when a communication was printed urging the 
voters to support the cause of separation. But the people 
of Maine were that year too eager to defeat Governor Strong 

1 Independent Chronicle, March 2, 1797. 


and elect James Sullivan in his place to be drawn into any 
side issues. Not a single return from any town on the question 
of separation appeared in the " Argus," nor was the subject 
again mentioned in that paper ; but there was an abundance of 
jubilation over the triumph of Governor Sullivan and the Jef- 
fersonian Republicans, which was accomplished by the vote of 
Maine. As a matter of fact the votes for separation numbered 
3,370 ; against, 9,404. 

Apparently there was no revival of the agitation for separa- 
tion until after the War of 1812. That contest accentuated the 
differences and the discord between the two parts of the Com- 
monwealth. The people of Massachusetts proper were opposed 
to the war at the outset. Not to enter into any of the questions 
as to the attitude of the State authorities, of the public men, or 
of the people generally, during the progress of the war, it is 
enough to say that the attitude of the leaders and of the people 
of Maine was quite different. Maine suffered greatly during 
those years. Its coast was invaded and some of its marine towns 
were captured and occupied by the British. The people com- 
plained that the Commonwealth did not protect them and did 
not allow them to adopt means to protect themselves. In the 
Massachusetts House of Representatives, June 6, 1814, a com- 
mittee was appointed " to consider the expediency of adopting 
some mode of ascertaining the opinion of the people of this 
Commonwealth respecting the separation of the District of 
Maine from Massachusetts in order that the former may be 
constituted a distinct and separate State." It will be observed 
that the proposition involved a vote of the people in all parts 
of the Commonwealth, — the only instance in which a full vote 
was proposed, 1 The committee reported on June 14 that the 
matter be referred to the next session. 

The war was raging fiercely, and later in the same year the 
Hartford Convention was called and held. In no other part 
of the Union, perhaps, did that famous convention call forth 
more exasperation than it did in Maine. That wide observer 
of events, Hezekiah Niles, reported the situation thus : 2 

" During the fever of rebellion that recently raged at Boston, and re- 
duced itself to the contempt it deserved in the famous meeting at Hart- 

i Except as a hostile amendment to the bill of 1819, under which the separa- 
tion was effected. 

2 Mles's Register, March 18, 1815. 


ford, the citizens of Maine appeared prepared for the worst, and had 
determined that if 'Massachusetts proper* lifted an arm against the 
union, or took any measures to effect a separation of the states, they, 
also, would come forth, and by a convention establish a provisional 
government and support the union, and bring about a separation from 
Massachusetts. " 

The reference is undoubtedly to a convention of delegates 
from the several towns in Oxford County, which was held on 
December 28, 1814, which adopted an address to the people of 
Maine, in which, among other things, it is said that " more than 
one third of the territory of the District of Maine is now in the 
undisturbed possession of the enemy." A series of ten resolu- 
tions was adopted, the first of which was to the effect " that it 
is expedient that the District of Maine constitute a part of the 
State of Massachusetts no longer than the State of Massachu- 
setts gives support to the Union." The address suggested a 
convention to take action in this sense, and the last resolution 
of the series declared for such a convention. 1 A similar con- 
vention of citizens of Kennebec and Somerset counties was 
held February 15, 1815, and adopted similar resolutions, but 
no general convention was held. But petitions for separation 
were sent to the General Court, and, together with a resolve 
for separation, introduced on February 6, 1815, by Albion K. 
Parris, senator from Oxford, were referred to a committee. 
The committee reported that it was " not expedient to pass 
•said resolves," and the Senate accepted the report on the 25th 
of February, 1815, by a vote of 17 to 10. 2 

This refusal, the first and only one in the long history of 
this agitation, stirred the advocates of separation into in- 
tense activity, and the subject was publicly and privately 
discussed, and earnestly canvassed, in all parts of the Dis- 
trict during the rest of the year. From the first the di- 
vision of public sentiment corresponded generally to the 
line of party division. Practically all the Democrats were 
in favor of separation ; indeed, so far as can now be ascer- 
tained, they were unanimous. The Federalists were not so 
fully united. The reason for this situation is easily to be 
discovered. The government of Massachusetts was in the 

1 Proceedings reported in the Portland " Argus " for January 15, 1815. 

2 Boston Daily Advertiser, February 28. 


hands of the Federalists, but in Maine it had long been the 
case that the Democrats were usually a majority. Not 
always, for even in 1814 there were four Federalists elected 
to Congress from the District, to three Democrats. But in 
the election of governor and legislature the majority was 
steadily with the Democrats. Separation meant a Demo- 
cratic State government, with offices and spoils. On the 
other hand, the Federalists preferred the existing situation 
to a government by their political opponents. At the same 
time the idea of independence appealed to men in both 
parties, and overcame, in the case of some Federalists, their 
political objections. 

We shall soon have to consider the condition of popular 
sentiment in Massachusetts proper, but it may be well here 
to offer a conjecture as to the motive behind the rejection 
of Senator Parris's resolve in February, 1815. In the 
earlier years of the century Maine was growing in popula- 
tion more rapidly than old Massachusetts. There was not a 
little apprehension that Maine, with its strong Democratic 
majority, would soon dominate the government of the Com- 
monwealth. More than once the District had turned the 
scale against the Federalists. So long as this condition of 
things lasted political expediency dictated that the Feder- 
alists should consent eagerly to a dismemberment of the 
Commonwealth, as that would insure their ascendancy. But 
now they had recovered favor. Massachusetts was growing ; 
Maine was not, but was rather losing population. The rea- 
son for giving consent had disappeared. State pride dictated 
the retention of the entire territory. Moreover, a natural 
resentment at the hostile attitude of the people of Maine, 
and an unwillingness to add a Democratic State to the Union, 
led the Federalists to oppose granting the request for sepa- 
ration. At all events the rejection of the resolve by the 
Senate in 1815 was by a party vote, and it is impossible not 
to see party politics in the attitude of the Massachusetts 

Not many newspapers were published in Maine at the 
time, but those that were in existence ranged themselves 
on the two sides of the separation question according to 
their political proclivities. The ''Eastern Argus" of Port- 
land was the leading Democratic paper, and also the most 


prominent advocate of separation. The Portland " Gazette," 
Federalist, led the opposition. 1 

The " Argus " began, November 8, 1815, a series of com- 
municated articles headed " The District of Maine," in which 
the whole question of separation was discussed. The subject 
was considered from every point, and the objections were 
also taken up and answered. The papers were twelve in 
number, and were published weekly. The tone was tem- 
perate and the treatment able. So much cannot be said of 
the writings of the editor and of other correspondents, who grew 
vehement and vituperative, as the amount of space given to 
the subject increased. 

The first editorial reference to the movement that I have 
been able to discover in any Boston paper was in the " Ad- 
vertiser." On the day before the January meeting of the 
General Court the editor remarked : " The leaders of the 
Democratic party in the District of Maine have been for 
some time exerting themselves to effect a separation of the 
District from this Commonwealth for the purpose of erect- 
ing it into a new State. We are not very fully informed 
of the state of public opinion on this subject ; but are in- 
clined to believe that except with the men who aspire to 
offices of profit and dignity in the new Commonwealth there 
is very little anxiety to accomplish the object." 2 Although 
the agitation did not to him seem formidable, the legisla- 
ture was quickly flooded with petitions for separation, and 
on the 17th of January a committee was appointed to con- 
sider the subject. On the 3d of February the committee 
reported in the Senate a resolve providing for a vote of 
the people of Maine on the 20th of May upon the question 

1 The following extract from the " Carrier's Address " of the " Gazette " at 
New Year's, 1816, is a sarcastic reference to the movement : 

" There is, it seems, in operation 
A scheme that causes agitation. 
Its object is to separate 
This District from its parent State! 
And thus to add, by calculation, 
A star to our bright constellation. 
Now should an eastern star thus honor 
Our valiant country's starry banner, 
Then will such furious joy abound 
As will unnumbered worlds confound." 

2 Boston Daily Advertiser, January 16, 1816. 


" Shall the Legislature be requested to give its consent to 
the separation of the District of Maine from Massachusetts " 
and its formation into a separate and independent State. 
The matter was assigned for consideration on the 6th, and 
was passed by the Senate on that day. The only division 
was on an amendment proposed for the purpose of postpon- 
ing the vote of the people of Maine until a later time than 
May. The amendment was defeated by yeas 8, nays 24. 
In the minority appear the names of Josiah Quincy and 
Harrison Gray Otis. The leader of the separationists in 
the Senate was John Holmes, senator from York, who was 
prominent in the movement from 1814 until the separation 
was effected, and who was also the leading Democrat in 
the District. An amendment to the resolve requiring town 
officers to return the whole number of qualified voters as 
well as the numbers of votes given for and against separa- 
tion, was adopted, and the resolve was passed unanimously, 
so far as appears from the journal. The House of Repre- 
sentatives also passed the resolve without opposition on 
February 9. 

A motion was made in that body to postpone the vote until 
the third Monday in November. " Mr. Lincoln, jun., one of 
the joint committee who prepared the resolve, stated that it 
was proposed to have a convention of delegates in Maine to 
form a skeleton of a constitution for the District : but this 
proposition was considered as going too far, and was unani- 
mously rejected by the committee. It was proposed to fix on 
March meetings, or the day for the choice of governor ; but 
such days were considered improper, as this subject might be 
mingled with electioneering: the 20th of May will be after the 
elections. The sooner the suspense and agitation of the citi- 
zens of Maine are over, the better : hence the impropriety of 
postponement till November. Different opinions were enter- 
tained, and different declarations had been made with regard 
to the sentiments of the District: some believing there is not 
a majority in favor of division, and others asserting that three 
fourths were anxious for such separation. Should there be a 
bare majority in favor of separation, the legislature will exercise 
its judgment in granting or denying the request : a commanding 
majority will be almost compulsory on the legislature." l 
i Boston Commercial Gazette, February 12, 1816. 


After Mr. Lincoln's speech the motion to amend was nega- 
tived and the House concurred with the Senate. A day or 
two afterward both houses passed an order raising a committee 
to examine the petitions for separation to ascertain how exten- 
sive the movement was. The committee reported that forty- 
nine towns had petitioned, and that there were individual 
petitions from forty-three others ; that the population of the 
petitioning towns was 50,264 ; that the individual petitioners 
numbered 2,936 ; that, the whole population of the District was 
228,705, in 210 towns ; and that more than one-fifth of the 
population appeared to be asking for the change. 

There was great popular activity in Maine in the months of 
March, April, and May. County and neighborhood meetings 
were held by the advocates and opponents of separation. " An 
immense concourse of highly respectable citizens" assembled 
at Augusta on the 22d of April. Among those prominent in 
the gathering were William King, afterward the first governor 
of Maine, who was the Democratic candidate for lieutenant- 
governor on the ticket with Samuel Dexter, in 1814; John 
Neal ; John Chandler; Nathan Weston, Jr.; and Henry W. 
Fuller, — all well-known Maine men who afterward filled im- 
portant places in the State government or in Washington. 
The convention adopted strong resolutions in favor of separa- 
tion, for reasons already so familiar that they need not be 
repeated. A sly hit was given at Massachusetts in the sug- 
gestion that, when separated, the new State " would enjoy 
equally with other States the protection of the federal govern- 
ment in defending it from foreign invasion and in suppressing 
domestic insurrection." It was unanimously 

" Resolved, therefore, as the sense of this meeting, that the period has 
arrived when the best interests of Maine will be promoted by a separa- 
tion from Massachusetts proper, and that we will individually use all fair 
and honorable means to effect these objects." 

The opponents were not less active than the advocates of 
separation. They also held great meetings at which the ob- 
jections to the change proposed were rehearsed : the expense 
of the new government ; the advantages of connection with 
the old Commonwealth ; and many others. They called at- 
tention to the attempts that were made to secure a large 
vote for separation in Kennebec County by the assurance that 


Augusta would be the capital of the State, and in Cumberland 
County by a similar expectation that Portland would be the 
seat of government. They brought forward one really solid 
and serious objection based upon the then existing coasting law 
of the United States. It was first suggested at an anti- 
separation gathering at Warren, a coast town in Lincoln 
County. Attention was called to the fact that so long as 
Maine was a part of Massachusetts a Maine coasting vessel 
could trade between the two parts of the State with a coasting 
license. But if Maine were an independent State, it would be 
necessary under the law for such a vessel to enter and clear at 
the custom house on every trip, and to pay a fee for so doing. 
The explanation is that under the coasting law passed by the 
first Congress 1 a coasting vessel might trade, without entering 
and clearing, between any two ports in the same State, or with 
a port in the next adjoining State. This gave Maine coasting 
vessels the privilege of trading as far as Rhode Island with a 
coasting license. But if Maine were an independent State, its 
vessels could not go beyond the next adjoining State of New 
Hampshire without entering and clearing at the custom house. 

To this argument the advocates of separation replied that 
Congress would surely redress such a grievance, and they 
pointed to the fact that relief had been granted in one case. 
Congress had passed a law permitting coasting vessels to trade 
between Rhode Island and Long, Island, across the sound. 2 
Undoubtedly the law which would diminish the rights of 
coasting vessels caused a loss of many hundred votes in the 
maritime counties, when the second vote was taken in Septem- 
ber. For the coasting trade formed one of the largest interests 
in those counties. But the significance of the law was not 
fully understood at the time of the vote in May. Before sep- 
aration was actually effected Congress passed a new coasting 
law 3 creating two great coasting districts divided by the mouth 
of the Perdido River, which separates Alabama from Florida. 
The coasting privilege was extended to all vessels to trade 
under a license between any two ports within each great dis- 
trict, without entering and clearing at the custom house. 

In striking contrast with the turmoil in Maine was the in- 

1 Chapter XI, sec. 25. Approved September 1, 1789. 
« By a law of March 2, 1795. 

• 15th Cong. 2d Sess., Chap. XLVIII, approved March 2, 1819. 



difference manifested in Massachusetts proper. At least we 
may infer indifference from the absence of editorial com- 
ment on the question from the Boston newspapers, and 
from the fact that no reference was made in their news 
columns to the progress of the movement in the District. 
The only paragraph on the subject between the time of the 
passage of the resolve and the vote in Maine, so far as I 
can discover, was in the " Advertiser " of May 17. " To us 
in this part of the State," remarked Mr. Hale, " the question 
is of comparatively trifling importance. It could not, there- 
fore, be expected that we should be very strenuous advo- 
cates or opponents of separation." But he thought that on 
the whole the best interests of both would be served by their 
remaining one State. 

The indifference of the Boston papers, particularly those 
of its own political persuasion, moved the "Argus" to wrath. 
In the issue for May 7, 1816, it remarked that the Boston 
Republican newspapers were zealous enough in advocating 
separation " whenever they expect to effect some party pur- 
pose. But when the people of Maine engage in good earnest 
in establishing their independence, then, indeed, are we 
abandoned by our Boston Republicans — we no longer have 
their aid. . . . Their illiberal and selfish policy has been 
fully evinced during the present discussion of separation. 
The ' Patriot,' the 4 Chronicle,' and the ' Yankee' have pur- 
sued the most studious silence — have cautiously avoided 
saying anything that would give us the least aid. In fact 
the ' Centinel ' has been the only paper in Boston that has 
treated the subject with any degree of candor or fairness. 1 
If our Republican brethren in Boston are opposed to separa- 
tion, let them come out openly. If they are in favor, let them 
advocate it manfully — anything, however, but this shuffling, 
double-dealing policy." 

We get from this extract not a little light on the real 
sentiments of the politicians of Massachusetts proper. So 
long as the District was a part of the State there was not a 
little political capital to be made by the Republicans — or 

1 The "Centinel" did not relish commendation by the " Argus," for it re- 
ferred thus to the matter: "The praises of the Thing in Portland have ever 
received our contempt, — its abuse is intitled to our acknowledgements" (May 
18). The " Argus "the following week took back its compliment and tendered 
to the editor of the " Centinel " " the homage of our indignation and contempt." 


Democrats — in standing by their fellow partisans in Maine. 
But if there were any real chance for the success of the 
separationists, the result of that success would be to put 
them in a hopeless minority in State affairs. 

Under the unamended Constitution of Massachusetts the 
election of governor and senators was held on " the first 
Monday of April," but representatives were chosen on vari- 
ous days " in the month of May, ten days at least before 
the last Wednesday of the month." At both elections all 
political issues were disregarded and the question of separa- 
tion only was considered. A large majority of the senators 
and representatives chosen in the District were in favor of 
separation. On the 20th of May 17,075 votes were given 
on the important question, — 10,584 in favor, 6,491 opposed. 
The whole number of legal voters in the District was 37,938. 
Less than one-half of them, therefore, went to the polls, — 
a strange circumstance, considering the eager and even im- 
perative character of the canvass that preceded the election. 
A possible explanation may be found in the fact that the 
advocates of separation declared — although urging every 
man to vote — that those who did not vote should properly 
be reckoned as favoring the change, and that the opponents 
maintained that those who refrained from voting should be 
counted as opposed to it. 

The General Court met on the 29th of May. The Sen- 
ate consisted of 22 Federalists and 18 Democrats. The 
House had about 350 Federalists and 300 Democrats. Gov- 
ernor Brooks delivered his address on the 5th of June, but 
made no mention of the project of a division of the Com- 
monwealth. On the next day, the 6th, the subject was 
brought before the House, and a committee was elected by 
ballot to take the matter into consideration. The committee 
chosen consisted of Messrs. Gorham of Boston, Fay of Cam- 
bridge, Saltonstall of Salem, Lawrence of Groton, Hubbard 
of Boston, and Howard of Newburyport. These gentlemen 
had 157 votes out of about 300. " Several tickets were voted 
for," said the " Chronicle," " but the above was supported 
by the advocates of separation from [sic] Maine." The Sen- 
ate members of the committee were Messrs. Harrison Gray 
Otis of Suffolk, Dudley L. Pickman of Essex, Timothy 
Fuller of Middlesex, John Pickering of Essex, and Thomas 


Weston of Plymouth. It will be seen that the committee 
consisted entirely of senators and representatives of Massa- 
chusetts proper. 

The committee reported to the Senate, on June 13, a bill 
giving the consent of Massachusetts to the erection of the 
State, providing for the election of delegates to a conven- 
tion to form a constitution, and prescribing the terms of 
separation. Mr. Otis accompanied the bill with a long writ- 
ten report, which Mr. John Holmes immediately charac- 
terized as one of the ablest state papers he had ever heard. 
Mr. Otis suggested, in his report, that the returns of the 
May vote implied indifference, and if that alone were con- 
sidered the result would not justify any measures tending 
ever so remotely to exclude a great number from the gov- 
ernment which seemed to suit them. But the committee 
is satisfied " that no conclusion uniformly applicable to the 
sentiments and motives of the citizens who absented them- 
selves from the town meeting can be drawn from the mere 
fact of their absence." He gives the reasons for this opinion, 
and says that whiie the committee did not wish to encour- 
age separation, on the contrary hoped that it would not 
take place, they u cannot resist the persuasion that some 
other means for ascertaining the deliberate sense of the 
people in that district have become expedient." To do 
otherwise would probably excite a spirit of discontent and 
a sense of injustice, and cause bitterness that ought not to 
be aroused. On the other hand, a readiness manifested by 
Massachusetts to remove all obstacles to a fair result must 
be accepted as a pledge of her magnanimity and candor. 

Under the bill reported by the committee the people of 
Maine were to elect delegates to a convention which was to 
meet in Brunswick on the 26th of August. If a majority 
of the delegates should be in favor of separation, that fact 
was to be taken as proof that the people wished to dissolve 
their connection with Massachusetts, and the convention 
was to proceed to form a constitution. The conditions im- 
posed by Massachusetts concerned a great variety of matters, 
— the ownership of public property, the State debt, the 
relations of the two States to Bowdoin College, the division 
of the public lands in the District, and the question of the 
taxation of that part of the lands which would be owned 


by Massachusetts, — these and other matters that need not be 
mentioned. The bill required that the conditions should be 
adopted by the convention and become ipso facto a part of 
the constitution of Maine. That phrase ipso facto was used 
sarcastically, with how much effect cannot be guessed, by 
the opponents of separation in the ensuing campaign as one 
of their arguments against the acceptance of the permission 
to create a new State. No doubt it did frighten some 
ignorant voters. 

The bill, reported to the Senate on June 13, was consid- 
ered on the 14th, when several amendments were adopted. 
One of these amendments in the end caused the failure of 
the movement. It was originally provided that u the said 
convention when organized as aforesaid shall have the au- 
thority to declare, by the majority of the delegates chosen, 
the assent of the people of said District to be formed into 
a separate and independent State." The amendment re- 
ferred to struck out this clause and others dependent on it, 
and provided that the people should vote again on the first 
Monday in September (the 2d) upon the direct question 
whether they wished to be formed into a new State; that 
they should at the same time choose delegates to a conven- 
tion to be held at Brunswick on the last Monday in Sep- 
tember (the 30th) ; that the convention after organizing 
should count the votes expressive of the people's wishes, 
" and if it shall appear to said convention that a majority 
of five to four at least of the votes returned are in favor 
of said District's becoming an independent State, then and 
not otherwise said convention shall proceed to form a con- 
stitution as provided in this act." 

It is a part of the singular history of this agitation that 
the foregoing amendment was offered in the Senate by the 
Hon. John Holmes. 1 Mr. Holmes, who represented York 
County, was the foremost member of the Maine delegation 
in the legislature, and the leading Democrat in the District 
of Maine. He was elected a member of Congress that year, 
was transferred to the Senate in 1820 as one of the first 
senators from Maine, and served in that body, with an in- 
terval of a year, until 1833. In view of his authorship of 
the " five to four " clause his subsequent course in the Bruns- 

1 See " Columbian Centine!/' October 12, 181(5. 


wick convention, to be narrated presently, is an admirable 
illustration of the political ethics of the man — some would 
say of the party, some, even, of the time. 

The Senate passed the bill on the 15th of June by a 
vote of 35 to 1. The negative vote was given by the Hon. 
Josiah Quincy. 1 The bill went to the House of Represen- 
tatives, where a determined effort was made to defeat it 
by a motion to postpone the bill until the next session. A 
long debate took place on this proposition, which is sum- 
marized in the " Centinel." The only passage which it is 
necessary to quote is this, from the argument of the separa- 
tionists : " that the bill as amended in the Senate was cal- 
culated to remove all remaining doubts as to the sentiments 
of the people of Maine on the subject " — as a vote was to 
be taken — " and if five-ninths of the votes are not in favor 
of the separation, then the subject and all measures respect- 
ing it are to sleep forever." The reference to five-ninths 
of the votes is explained hereafter. The motion to post- 
pone was rejected, 118 to 58. The next day the bill was 
passed to be engrossed by a vote of 107 to 51. 2 Students 
of the history of parliamentary procedure will be interested 
in the fact that on June 19, after the bill had passed both 
branches in concurrence, the matter was taken up again in 
the Senate, when the bill was not before it ; two amend- 
ments were adopted and were sent by Mr. Otis, conveying 
the message, to the House, which also adopted them. 

The storm burst forth in Maine immediately upon the pas- 
sage of the act. The election upon which everything depended 
was to take place in eleven weeks, and although the people 
were already greatly excited they were stirred to even greater 
activity. The newspapers discussed the question with enlarg- 
ing headlines, and their pages became spotty with capital letters 
and italics. Mass meetings and conventions were called and 
held by both parties in all parts of the District. The advocates 
of separation had been so much more active in the past that 
they had little new to offer by way of argument. The oppo- 
nents, on the other hand, found several new reasons, — some 

1 " Josiah Quincy, who onceattempted in Congress to impeach Mr. Jefferson, 
was again in a minority of one on the Separation Question in the Massachusetts 
Senate." (" Boston Patriot.") 

2 It will be remembered that the House consisted of 650 members. The 
vote illustrates the system of absenteeism that prevailed. 


of them of not a little weight, others silly and frivolous. 
One opponent suggested that separation was " the offspring of 
British influence." Great Britain was soon again to make 
war on the United States, and if Maine were a separate State 
" she would be subjugated to the English crown and formed 
into a little kingdom. " 

That may be set down as one of the humors of the agitation. 
Rather more reasonable was the contention by the members of 
the legislature from Lincoln, Hancock, and Washington coun- 
ties — along the coast- — who were opposed to separation, that 
the erection of a new State within the limits of another was 
forbidden by the Constitution of the United States. The 
clause reads, with the official punctuation : 

" New states may be admitted by the congress into this union ; but no 
new state shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other 
state ; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or 
parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures concerned as well 
as of the congress.'' 

There is certainly good ground for maintaining that the three 
clauses are distinct, that the second is an absolute prohibition, 
and that the use of the plural " legislatures " limits to cases 
where two or more States are concerned the permission to form 
new States, and therefore excludes all cases where the consent 
of one legislature only is to be obtained. However, except in 
the discussion in Maine itself, this point was never raised. 

The argument of the opposition which had the most effect, 
except in the coast counties where the shipping question was 
chiefly discussed, was that the terms proposed by Massachu- 
setts were unsatisfactory. Objection was made to the division 
of State property, but particularly to a provision that the share 
of Massachusetts in the public lands in Maine should not be 
taxed so long as the Commonwealth retained the ownership. 
It was urged upon the voters that Massachusetts might lease 
the land for long terms of years and thus enable the tenants to 
avoid taxation. Only the most prejudiced persons could have 
believed that the Commonwealth would descend to such a 
measure, but the argument had its effect. 

How did the Boston newspapers, which undoubtedly repre- 
sented public opinion, regard the agitation ? Apparently they 
took but the slightest interest in it and did not interfere in any 


way. There are only a few scattered references to the subject 
in any Boston newspaper of either party, from June to Sep- 
tember, 1816. The only important editorial expression in that 
time is an article in the Boston " Daily Advertiser" of July 26. 
" Nor do we think," Mr. Hale remarked, " that we in this 
part of the state are entirely without an interest in the decision; 
though the effects of this measure must be much less on us than 
on our brethren in the District. Their decision, however, will 
be made without any reference to our interests or wishes; and 
we are not disposed to exercise any influence on them other 
than to state very briefly and as candidly as possible our views 
of the proposed measure." He then went on to give the rea- 
sons why he thought the separation to be inexpedient from the 
Maine point of view: (1) that there was no necessity for it, 
no grievance, no real inconvenience in the existing situation ; 
(2) that a large State was better than a small one, and that, for 
example, Rhode Island would be better off if it were a part of 
Massachusetts ; (3) that the fact of remoteness from the cap- 
ital was an argument of little weight ; (4) that the expense of 
carrying on the new State would be burdensome. Evidently 
Mr. Hale did not enter into the feelings of the people of Maine. 
If the arguments he advanced had been the strongest that 
could be adduced, the vote for separation would have been little 
short of unanimous. 

The "Advertiser" did again refer to the agitation. Some 
separationists having preferred an absurd charge that the con- 
nection with Massachusetts had bankrupted the Maine banks, 
because the Massachusetts banks sent the bills of the Maine 
banks home for redemption, and compelled specie payment, 
the " Advertiser" on August 3 defended the practice, and 
showed that the discount on Maine bank bills was from one- 
quarter of one per cent to one per cent. 

On the 2d of September the contest came to an end between 
those who were hankering for offices which were not theirs, 
according to the anti-separationists, and the office holders 
and those who were hoping for office, according to the sepa- 
rationists. The returns came in slowly. The group of towns 
first reported showed a majority of more than " five to four," 
but within a day or two the numbers were less favorable. 
When fifty-eight towns had been heard from, the Portland 
" Gazette " remarked, with exultant sarcasm, u it is greatly to 


be feared that we shall be under the necessity of continuing 
our ' vassalage ' to old Massachusetts." The vote continued 
close to the end, but there was always a deficiency of the 
necessary majority. The final official vote was 11,969 yeas, 
10,317 noes. Evidently this was not " five to four." Five- 
ninths of the total vote, 22,316, is 12,398; four-ninths is 9,918. 
Four hundred and twenty-nine men had voted the wrong 

But the separationists were not the men to give it up so. 
The convention was to meet anyway, they had elected a large 
majority of the delegates, and they had the able and ingenious 
John Holmes of Alfred for a leader. Some of the delegates 
were not disposed to attend the convention, as they thought 
there was nothing to do but to count the votes and adjourn. 
But the separationists urged every man to be there, and the 
opponents had too much experience to be caught napping. 

The convention assembled in the meeting-house at Bruns- 
wick on the 30th of September. There was a contest in the 
election of a president, but the result, 97 votes for William 
King and 85 for Ezekiel Whitman, was not a test of the 
strength of the two parties. Inasmuch as the proceedings 
were abortive, and since they have been published and sum- 
marized many times, it is not worth while to repeat them here. 
The only exception must be the singular attempt on the part 
of the committee to which the returns of the popular vote 
were referred to make it appear that the condition of " a ma- 
jority of five to four at least " had been met. The state of the 
vote has already been given, — 11,969 yeas, 10,317 nays. The 
committee, of which John Holmes was chairman, — it will be 
remembered that he was the mover of the amendment in the 
Massachusetts Senate, — professed to find great difficulty in 
determining the interpretation of the phrase, but had no diffi- 
culty in interpreting it in different ways. The method which 
commended it to the committee was this : the aggregate ma- 
jority in the towns voting yes was 6,031 ; the aggregate adverse 
majority in the towns voting no was 4,409. Now, as five is to 
four, so is 6,031 to 4,829. Consequently the noes failed by 420 
to cast the requisite number. This absurd report was accepted 
by the convention after protracted debate. 

If the separationists had had faith in their own interpreta- 
tion, they would have proceeded to form a constitution. Some 



of them were in favor of so doing, but that policy was aban- 
doned. It is well known, and was asserted at the time without 
contradiction, that many of the separationists voted for the re- 
port, not because they accepted its remarkable arithmetic, but 
in the hope that the General Court, in consideration of the fact 
that a considerable majority had voted for separation, would 
instruct the convention to reassemble and proceed with its 

The report as it was originally drawn and adopted was much 
more aggressive than in its final form. The convention at 
first voted that if the legislature soon to be in session should, 
" as they undoubtedly will, confirm this construction " of the 
five to four clause, u much dispute would be prevented " ; but 
if, " contrary to all reasonable expectation, the decision should 
be unfavorable, we could, at an adjourned session, determine 
for ourselves, and carry the act into full effect agreeably to our 
own understanding of its provisions." All the foregoing was 
struck out of the report after a reconsideration of its adoption 
had been carried on motion of Mr. Holmes. Another pas- 
sage, which was also struck out, was as follows : " But should 
Massachusetts give an unfavorable interpretation of the act, or 
refuse to modify it as justice requires, Congress would decide 
whether we have not complied with the conditions upon which 
the consent of Massachusetts was obtained." 

The separationists and their opponents each adopted a me- 
morial to the legislature in which they argued their respective 
cases, and the convention adjourned, never to meet again. 

The attempt to override and disregard the condition im- 
posed by the General Court seems to have caused a revulsion 
of feeling in old Massachusetts. The people in that part of 
the State, as we have seen, had previously been conciliatory, 
had acceded to the frequent requests to test public sentiment 
in the District, and had refrained from all acts and words that 
would influence the result. But this performance of the sep- 
arationists was too much for them. The "Worcester Spy" 1 said, 
contemptuously, that Mr. Holmes's plea was " a mode of cal- 
culation which in a schoolboy would merit a flogging." The 
"Centinel" 2 indignantly exclaimed, " Maine shall not be 
independent." The ''Daily Advertiser" 3 said: "We have 
heard the report repeatedly spoken of by gentlemen of both 
i October 16, 1816. 2 October 19. 3 October 17. 


political parties, and by those who wish the separation to 
take place as well as by those opposed to it, and they uni- 
formly regard it as one of the most contemptibly absurd 
documents that ever received the sanction of a public body 
of men." 

The interest in the matter is shown — and also the feel- 
ing of some people in the Massachusetts community at least, 
on the general question of the connection — by the appearance 
of communications in the newspapers. One of these com- 
munications, which appeared in the "Advertiser" of Octo- 
ber 19, over the signature of "Cato," is so plain spoken 
that a considerable extract from it is given : 

•' The truth is that the question of the separation of the District of 
Maine, though in terms acknowledged to be important, has not excited 
much interest in this part of the Commonwealth. It actually occa- 
sioned less discussion in the Legislature than a petty dispute about 
moving a half-toll turnpike gate. The District has been considered 
as a sort of nursling, whose support cost more than its services were 
worth. The peculiar situation of that country has been such as to 
give us a great deal of trouble, and to compel us in some instances 
to make general laws such as would never have been thought expe- 
dient or just had we legislated only for Massachusetts proper. It 
has been apprehended that there would be such an increase of the 
population of the District as that the question would be, according to 
the current phrase, not whether we should set off them, but whether 
they would set off us — and that possibly the seat of government might 
be removed to some place in the District. The Federalists have feared 
also for the ascendancy of their party, and that such a dead weight 
around our necks would soon drag us down to democracy. The citizens 
of this Commonwealth generally have felt a sort of pique occasioned 
by the clamor for separation in the District, and have said, ' if these 
people think they are oppressed, and are so anxious to get away from 
us, we can do very well without them, let them take their own course, 
run and be glorified.' " 

The writer then goes on in a calm and reasonable tone to 
argue that so great a change ought not to be made unless 
there was a strong majority in favor of it, that the terms 
were proposed at the instance of the separationists them- 
selves, and that justice to the minority required that, as the 
terms had not been met, the change should not be made. 

Another correspondent, in the issue of October 23, main- 


tained that Massachusetts, by reason of the diverse sentiments 
of the people of the State proper and the District, had been 
deprived of its proper political weight, and he attributed the 
loss to the influence of the delegates from Maine; " and 
that while Massachusetts exercised but a feeble, ineffectual 
moral and political authority over Maine, the latter was 
constantly weakening the respect for the government of 
Massachusetts, and gradually impairing the force and influ- 
ence of the laws by withdrawing from them their only real 
support in a free country, public opinion ; . . . that the un- 
principled majority in Maine, effecting a junction with their 
natural allies in Massachusetts proper, will finally endanger, 
if not overthrow, the literary, religious, and political institu- 
tions of the state." 1 This correspondent thought separation 
was inevitable, and he favored letting Maine go anyway, 
disregarding the actual state of the votes on the question 
and "the insolent, unjust, and ridiculous ground assumed by 
the convention at Brunswick. . . . Physically we still re- 
tain the people of Maine in a sort of subordination not 
much worse than that in which they have heretofore been 
held. For it is well known that for ten years past the laws 
have been regularly and unremittedly resisted in some of 
the barbarous parts of that semi-civilized District." 

All this was uncomplimentary enough to the people of the 
District. It is language that may usually be applied to the 
half-lawless condition of pioneer communities remote from 
the authority of courts. But it does give an explanation of 
the attitude toward separation of a considerable body of men 
in Boston. Nor is it difficult to detect in both of the com- 
munications cited a flavor of party politics — an apprehension 
on the part of Federalists that if Maine continued to be a 
part of the Commonwealth the power would soon pass to the 

It is rather remarkable that neither the Boston " Chron- 
icle " nor the " Patriot " made any comment whatever upon 
the doings of the Brunswick convention for more than a 
month after its adjournment. The only reference to the 

1 The remark last quoted explains the solicitude with which the General 
Court provided that in the constitution which was to be formed for Maine the 
charter of Bowdoin College was not to be amended without the consent of the 
legislatures of both States. 


affair was printed in the " Patriot "of November 16. That 
Democratic paper, speaking a good word for Holmes, said : 
" The writer of these remarks entirely differs from the framers 
of that report in the interpretation of the law of June last." 

The General Court met on November 13. Governor 
Brooks, in his speech, referred to the subject of separation 
in a conciliatory tone. The two peoples were of the same 
origin, educated in the same principles, had fought side by 
side. " May no root of bitterness spring up to alienate their 
affections, whether united or separate. Judging from the 
ingenuous and dispassionate manner in which the subject 
has been hitherto discussed in your respective houses, we 
may confidently hope that wisdom will mark its future 
progress." The committee of the Brunswick convention 
deputed to bring the matter to the attention of the legisla- 
ture, consisting of Albion K. Parris, John Davis, W. P. 
Preble, and John Chandler, called upon Governor Brooks to 
express their thanks to him for the delicate and courteous 
tone of his speech. Moreover, in their memorial to the 
legislature the} 7 said, with reference to the movement for 
separation, u it has often been the subject of the delibera- 
tions of the legislature, and we owe it to the people of Massa- 
chusetts thus publicly to acknowledge that it has always 
received prompt attention, and that the course adopted with 
respect to it has been uniformly liberal and magnanimous." 
The foregoing account of the proceedings, covering a period 
of more than thirty years, shows that this acknowledgment 
was just and true. Yet Mr. Blaine, speaking in the Senate 
of the United States on January 22, 1878, when presenting 
to the government the statue of William King said that the 
movement " had been resisted in Massachusetts, always with 
firmness, often with offensive arrogance. " It is a pity that 
Senators Dawes and Hoar were not provided with the facts 
that would have corrected this perversion of histor}'. 

The memorial from the Brunswick convention and a great 
number of remonstrances against separation were referred 
to the same committee that reported the bill at the June 
session. The committee took an unusually long time to 
consider the matter and did not report until December 3. 
As before, Mr. Otis made the report. The committee had 
" no hesitation " in rejecting the construction of the act by 


the convention. It argued in temperate language that the 
question ought not to be revived by that General Court. 
There seemed to be no evidence that the tide in favor of 
separation had been greatly if at all augmented, and in any 
event no time would be lost, as Congress would not be in 
session long enough to act upon the question of admitting 
the State. The committee reported two resolutions: " that 
the contingency upon which the consent of Massachusetts 
was to be given for the separation of Maine has not yet hap- 
pened, and that the powers of the Brunswick convention to 
take any measures tending to that event have ceased "; and 
'* that it is not expedient for the present General Court to 
adopt any further measures in regard to the separation of the 
District of Maine." The report was accepted by the Senate, 
and the resolutions were adopted, on the next day, December 
4, without debate; and the House concurred unanimously on 
the same day. 

That was the end of the movement in 1816. A few 
days later, December 11, the u Daily Advertiser " remarked 
that " the manner in which the question of separation was 
settled by the legislature seems to meet with general appro- 
bation. Indeed it was hardly opposed by the most strenuous 
separationists in the legislature, of whom a considerable num- 
ber were members of the Brunswick convention." 

No mention of the subject of separation occurs in the 
legislative journals for 1817-1818 or 1818-1819, save that a 
committee was appointed in 1817 to inquire into the expe- 
diency of paying the expenses of the Brunswick convention. 
The committee reported that it was inexpedient to take any 
action thereon, and the report was accepted. Nor for nearly 
two years was there any renewal of the agitation in Maine. 

In the spring of 1819 the movement was started again 
and quickly acquired great momentum. A committee of 
the Maine members of the legislature issued an address, 
April 19, to the people of the District, urging them, in the 
selection of representatives, to choose none but supporters 
of separation. They also urged that the towns petition for 
separation in their corporate capacity. At the annual elec- 
tions party differences were extinguished, and the sole issue 
was separation. Every senator elected from the District was 
in favor of separation, and of 127 representatives chosen 


by 89 towns, 114 were in favor of separation and only 13 
opposed. Both these numbers were subsequently increased 
by later returns. A great number of towns voted to petition 
the General Court in their corporate capacity. The opposi- 
tion was successful in only a few cases. The petitions began 
to pour into the State House on May 27, 1819, only a day or 
two after the meeting of the General Court. No less than 
94 such petitions were received by the Senate from the House 
of Representatives on the 31st. 

The committee to which the subject was referred con- 
sisted of Josiah Quincy of Suffolk, William King of Lincoln, 
William Moody of York, Jonathan H. Lyman of Hamp- 
shire, Leverett Saltonstall of Essex, and Benjamin Gorham 
of Suffolk, on the part of the Senate; and Messrs. Lewis of 
Gorham, Greenleaf of Quincy, Lawrence of Groton, Red- 
dington of Vassalborough, Moseley of Newburyport, Peabody 
of Boston, Leland of Roxbury, and Ames of Bath, on the 
part of the House. It will be seen that two of the six 
senators, and three of the eight representatives, were taken 
from the Maine delegation. 

A strong impression was made upon the community by 
the evident preponderance of the separation sentiment. On 
the 1st of June the " Daily Advertiser " remarked that the 
division of the State was the most important subject to be 
considered at that session ; that the disproportion between 
the number of petitioners and that of remonstrants " leaves 
little doubt that a very large proportion of the people of 
Maine are now in favor of separation " ; and that it was 
impossible for the legislature " to shut their eyes to these 
indications of the disposition of the people of Maine, or to 
refuse taking all proper measures for indulging them." 

Mr. Quincy brought in to the Senate the report of the 
committee on June 9. Although he was the reporter, it is 
quite evident, from his subsequent course, that he neither 
wrote the report nor assented to it. The report is a simple, 
moderate statement, — we may say an inevitable conclusion 
from the circumstances as they existed. The committee was 
convinced that nothing should be done by the legislature 
to hasten separation. On the contrary, they would gladly 
strengthen and promote the union that existed. The Com- 
monwealth was called upon to relinquish one-third of its 


citizens and more than a half of its territory. " But your 
committee have not been deterred by these considerations 
from listening to the prayer of the petitioners, and from 
recommending* such measures as they deem just and ex- 
pedient, however they regret the present application." They 
refer to the opinion, "now almost universal," that the sep- 
aration must take place at a day not far distant. They 
found that there were 130 petitions for separation and only 
5 against it. " They believe that to reject so many peti- 
tions, so far from having a tendency to allay the desire for a 
separation, would excite agitation and discontent." They 
regarded the present time as peculiarly favorable for ascertain- 
ing the real wishes of the people of Maine, as the situation 
was altogether tranquil and peaceful, and believed that there 
would never be a better time for submitting the matter to 
a test. 

The bill reported followed in general the lines of the act 
of 1816. The terms on which the consent of Massachusetts 
was to be given were slightly changed — the separationists 
in Maine declared that they were more favorable to the 
proposed new State than those in the earlier act; the oppo- 
nents asserted vehemently that they were even less favorable 
than those that had been rejected. In point of fact there 
were modifications in both directions, but not important either 
way. The process by which the new State was to come into 
being was nevertheless greatly changed. A general vote was 
to be taken on the fourth Mondaj^ in July (26th), on the 
question whether it was expedient that Maine should be- 
come a separate and independent State. The votes were to 
be returned to the Secretary of the Commonwealth and 
counted by the Governor and Council, " and if the number 
of votes for the measure shall exceed the number of votes 
against it by fifteen hundred, then and not otherwise the 
people shall be deemed to have expressed their consent and 
agreement" to the separation. Then the governor was to 
proclaim the result, and thereupon an election was to take 
place on the third Monday in September (21st) of delegates 
to a convention to meet in Portland on the second Monday 
in October (12th), to adopt a name for the new State and to 
form a constitution. This having been done, the convention 
was to submit the constitution to popular vote, and if it were 


adopted by a majority of the people, it was to come into 
effect, Congress concurring, on the loth of March, 1820. If 
the constitution should be rejected, the constitution of Massa- 
chusetts, so far as it was applicable, would become the con- 
stitution of Maine, until changed in due form, but the 
name chosen for the State was to stand in any event. Pro- 
vision was made for the continuance in office of those who 
then occupied the offices until the legislature of Maine 
ordered otherwise, and for the holding of courts. The laws 
of Massachusetts were to be the laws of Maine until amended 
or repealed. The president of the convention was to act as 
governor until a governor should be chosen. 

The Senate began the consideration of the measure on 
June 11, when Mr. Quincy moved to recommit it to the 
committee with instructions to report a bill providing for a 
vote of all the people of the Commonwealth on the question 
"Is it expedient that the District of Maine should become 
a separate and independent state ? " He supported this 
motion in a speech which is summarized in the " Daily 
Advertiser." It was directed wholly to the constitutional 
question whether it was competent for the legislature to give 
its consent to the division of the State. He was supported 
in his argument by Mr. Bannister of Essex. The speakers 
on the other side were Senators Moody of York, King of Lin- 
coln, and Grorham of Suffolk. The motion was rejected, 12 to 
24. In the affirmative were three Essex and three Worcester 
Senators, and one each from Suffolk, Middlesex, Plymouth, 
Hampshire, Norfolk, and Berkshire. The debate was contin- 
ued through the 12th and 14th (Monday). Amendments 
were proposed and rejected to require a two-thirds vote of 
the people of Maine in favor of separation, and a majority 
of 2,500 instead of 1,500. When the question came on pass- 
ing the bill to be engrossed, Mr. Quincy made a speech 
over two hours in length against the bill, which the "Daily 
Advertiser" characterized as " able, clear, and forcible," and 
Mr. Saltonstall one equally long in favor of the bill, which 
the same authority pronounced to be " ingenious and elo- 
quent." The bill was then passed by 26 votes to 11. All the 
nine senators from Maine were present and voted yes, but 
the bill had an ample majority without their votes. Politi- 
cally, the " Advertiser " says that the minority consisted of 



three Republicans and eight Federalists. Four senators who 
had supported Mr. Quincy's amendment to take a vote of all 
the people, voted for the passage of the bill. 

The House of Representatives began the consideration of 
the bill on the 16th. Mr. Rand of Boston proposed Mr. 
Quincy's amendment, but it was rejected, 83 to 168. On this 
vote, it is astonishing to record, there were 132 votes from 
Maine and only 119 from Massachusetts proper. The num- 
bers were : 

Yeas Nays 

Massachusetts proper 63 56 

Maine 20 112 

~83 168" 

On the next day, after a long debate, the bill was passed by 
a vote of 193 to 59. As the total number of votes given on 
the passage of the bill differed by one only from that on the 
amendment, it is probable that on this occasion also the Maine 
vote was the larger. But as the Maine opponents stood firm 
to the end, the majority of Massachusetts members in favor of 
the bill was greatly increased. Governor Brooks approved the 
act on June 19. 

If public sentiment in Massachusetts had been indifferent or 
mildly favorable to a division of the State prior to the final act 
and during the consideration of the bill by the legislature, it 
was aroused against it when opposition was too late. From 
the middle of June until the day in July when the vote was 
taken, the newspapers of Boston contained many communica- 
tions and editorial articles on the subject. It was universally 
recognized that the decision rested entirely with the people of 
Maine, and there was no attempt at or suggestion of bullying 
them. But they were appealed to strongly to remember the 
glories of the S-tate which had been won by them in common 
with the citizens of Massachusetts proper, were assured of the 
good will of their old fellow citizens, were told that they had 
no real grievances, and were warned against taking a leap in 
the dark. Correspondents of the several newspapers argued 
against the constitutionality of the act consenting to the sep- 
aration. There were also communications reproaching the 
members of the legislature for their easy surrender to the pe- 
titioners from Maine ; and others lamenting the pitiable state 
into which the Commonwealth was about to fall and the low 


rank which it was about to assume among the States of the 
Union. Almost all the references to the coming separation 
were of this character. So far as can be judged from them, 
the general feeling was one of regret at a decision which it 
had become too late to reverse. It would be difficult to sum- 
marize intelligibly the several utterances in the newspapers, 
which were most of them long and wordy; still more difficult, 
without occupying too much space, to give quotations from 

In Maine the separationists entered upon their brief cam- 
paign with the certainty of approaching victory. Their oppo- 
nents showed more vigor than confidence, but they struggled 
bravely to the end. The Portland " Gazette " was, as before, 
the leader of the opposition, and its last issue before the vote 
was given was devoted almost entirely to the subject, in 
broad columns and display type. Squibs, anecdotes, argu- 
ments, appeals, covered its pages. 1 Among serious and sound 
arguments were some silly suggestions, as that Massachu- 
setts wished to get rid of Maine, that the District was in- 
creasing in population so greatly that Boston was afraid that 
Maine would soon be in control, and that therefore it was 
for the interest of Maine to go slowly. 

It was evident, as soon as the earliest returns were received, 
that separation was triumphant. Every county in the Dis- 
trict gave a majority in favor of independence, ranging 
from 63 in Hancock to 3,309 in Kennebec. The proclama- 
tion of Governor Brooks announced the numbers as 17,091 
in favor, and 7,132 opposed, — a majority of almost ten thou- 
sand, and much more than the two-thirds which had been 
proposed in a hostile amendment. The governor called upon 
the people to elect delegates on the third Monday in Sep- 
tember to meet in convention at Portland on the second 
Monday in October. 

1 For example : 

" Separation must go/' said a wag to his fellow, 

As quaffing they sat and had made themselves mellow. 

" Go where ? " said a third as he rested from smoking, 

"Are you truly in earnest, or are you but joking ? " 

"I 'm as truly in earnest," he poutingly muttered, 

"As in any opinion that ever I uttered." 

" Why, then," said the other, " like you, I 'm a prophet, 

' Separation must go/ I assure you, to Tophet ! " 


As soon as the question was decided, the antagonisms that 
had existed while the controversy proceeded, were laid aside. 
Those who had been conspicuous in opposing the separation 
acquiesced graciously, and urged all to unite in laying deep 
and strong the foundations of the new State. 

The convention met on October 11. Daniel Cony of 
Augusta was the temporary chairman, and William King of 
Bath the permanent president. In accordance with the act 
he subsequently became acting governor, and was the first 
elected governor of Maine. There was a contest over the 
name of the new State. Columbus was suggested, 1 and also 
Ligonia, but Maine was the preference of a great majority 
of the delegates. By a majority of six, 119 to 113, 
" State " was preferred to " Commonwealth," and on a re- 
consideration the majority was nearly forty. There were 
some earnest debates in the convention upon certain provis- 
ions of the constitution, but there was little or no acrimony 
in the discussion. The session lasted a little more than a 
fortnight. The constitution was adopted by a vote of 236 
to 30, and was signed by the members; and the convention 
adjourned, October 29. The popular vote on the adoption 
of the constitution, as officially reported to the convention 
at its adjourned session, January 6, 1820, was 9,050 in favor 
and 796 against. More than a thousand votes, of which only 
77 were against the adoption of the constitution, were not 
counted, on account of irregularities. The struggle in Con- 
gress over the admission of Maine as a separate State, and 
the complication of the question with that of the admission 
of Missouri, form no appropriate part of this narrative. Pres- 
ident Monroe signed the Maine bill on March 3, and on 
March 15, 1820, the separation from Massachusetts became 

Attention was called to two serials of the Proceedings which 
were on the table for distribution, — the first covering the 
meetings for January, February, and March, and the second 
containing the record of the April and May meetings ; and it 
was stated that bound copies of the twentieth volume of the 
second series of the Proceedings would probably be ready for 

1 Because the convention first met on the anniversary of the day when 
Columbus first discovered signs of land. 


distribution in July ; and it was hoped that Judge Chamber- 
lain's History of Chelsea would be ready for publication in 

Remarks were also made during the meeting by Rev. Dr. 
Edward E. Hale and by Messrs. Arthur Lord, Andrew 
McF. Davis, and William R. Ltvermore. 

After the adjournment the members and a small number of 
invited guests were entertained at luncheon by the President 
in the Ellis Hall. 



The stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 10th instant, at 
three o'clock, P. M. ; the President in the chair. The record 
of the June meeting was read and approved; and the Libra- 
rian reported the usual list of donors to the Library. In the 
absence of the Corresponding Secretary from illness, his report 
was made by Samuel A. Green. 

James K. Hosmer, late of Minneapolis, Minnesota, was 
elected a Corresponding Member. 

William R. Thayer presented the following minute, which 
was adopted ; and the Corresponding Secretary was instructed 
to send a copy of the same to Professor Villari : 

The Massachusetts Historical Society congratulates Professor Pas- 
quale Villari on the celebration of his eightieth birthday, after a life 
of distinguished service in education, letters, and patriotic endeavor, 
and in producing historical works of international reputation and 
permanent value. 

Samuel A. Green made the following remarks: 

I have been requested by Mrs. Elizabeth Anna (Byles) 
Ellis, of Burlington, New Jersey, to give in her name a chair 
of some historical interest, and by associations closely con- 
nected with Massachusetts, which once belonged to William 
Tailer, at different times Lieutenant-Governor 1 of the Province, 
to whom, during one of his administrations, it was presented 
by Queen Anne. The chair is made of carved oak, and the 
carving shows the royal crown supported by cherubs, and also 
the rose of the royal arms. The caning of the seat and of 
the back has been renewed, and the solid carved bar in front, 
forming part of the seat, replaces one that was broken. In 

1 Lieutenant-Governor, October 3, 1711, to October 4, 1716, and from April 
14, 1730, to his death, " at his Seat in Dorchester," on March 1, 1731-32 ; Acting 
Governor, November 9, 1715, to October 4, 1716, and from June 30 to August 8, 


other respects it is the same as when used by the Lieutenant- 
Governor nearly two hundred years ago. 

Mrs. Ellis is a lady of advanced age, — having been born on 
December 11, 1813, — and a great-great-granddaughter of 
Lieutenant-Governor Tailer, whose daughter Rebecca married 
Mather Byles, a grandson of Increase Mather. By this con- 
nection she is also a descendant of John Cotton, whose memo- 
rial statue is to be formally transferred to the First Church 
this afternoon. It was her sister Miss Sarah Louisa Byles 
who at the March meeting in 1881 presented to this Library 
the Bible that once belonged to the Mather family. It was 
given originally to Mrs. Increase Mather by her father John 
Cotton, and on the titlepage it bears the autograph of the old 
Puritan minister. It is a copy of the Geneva version, quarto, 
printed in London (1599). 

Dr. Green also said : 

The following petition, found among the Massachusetts Ar- 
chives (CXXVIII. 60) at the State House, suggests a wide 
range for the imagination. It bears no date, but as Andros 
was deposed on April 20, 1689, it must have been written 
before that date. It would be interesting to know what power 
Mr. Talbot, the writer, had in mind that would propel his en- 
gine against wind and tide. Was it the application of steam 
to machinery ? Almost certainly it was not electricity. He 
may have been the Bell or Edison of that century, who died 
without making his mark. At any rate, the petition is a cu- 
rious old paper, and well worth a note in our Proceedings. It 
is furthermore of interest as showing at that early period in 
our history that patents were granted in New England, and 
that the customary limit was for fourteen years. 

To S r Edmond Andros 
Knig* Captain Generall & Govern- 
er in Cheif over this his Majestys 
Territorys of New : E. 
The humble petition of Christopher Talbot Turner in Boston 
Humbly sheweth 

That whereas your petitioner with great pains & expence hath found 
out an Engine usefull for divers trades men as turners ropemakers 
smiths & all sorts of mills for corne sider sawmills & almost any thing 
that is to be done by wheels with sails & also hath discouered to make 


a boat sail against the wind & tide & sundry other things with more 
ease & expedition then hath ben discovered hitherto either in Europe 
or America. & wheras his Majesty & his royall Predicessors haue at 
all times been pleas'd graciously to Encourage all undertakings of this 
nature y* whosoever finds out any new engine or invention profitable 
for y e common good to grant their letters patents for the sole use 

Therefore y r petitioner is humbly bold & beggs y l y r Excelency will 
be pleas'd to grant him y r letters pattents for y e sole use & improuement 
of the said Engine in these his Majesties territories of New : E. for 14 
years (as is accustomed) & y K no other person shall make use of the 
same or any such like without y r petitioners consent, who is in duty 
bound & shall for ever pray 

Christopher Talbot 

Another instance I recall to mind, where the genius of in- 
yention drew near to the door of discovery and found it ajar, 
but did not enter. It appears in an address made by Wendell 
Phillips in Music Hall at a Public School Festival, on July 25, 
1865, and printed in the " Boston Evening Transcript" of the 
next day. The extract is as follows : 

There was an old Boston merchant, years ago, wanted a set of china 
made in Pekin. You know that Boston men, sixty years ago, looked 
at both sides of a cent before they spent it, and if they earned twelve 
cents they would save eleven. He could not spare a whole plate, so he 
sent a cracked one, and when he received the set there was a crack in 
every piece. The Chinese had imitated the pattern exactly. Now, 
boys, do not imitate us, or there will be a great many cracks. Be bet- 
ter than we. We have invented a telegraph, but what of that ? I ex- 
pect, if I live forty years, to see a telegraph that will send messages 
without wire, both ways at the same time. If you do not invent it you 
are not as good as we are. You are bound to go ahead of us. 

It would be interesting to know what germ of an idea was 
at work in Mr. Phillips's brain at that time. In some matters 
he was a seer, and perhaps saw the possibilities of the future 
in wireless telegraphy better than some of his contemporaries. 
At any rate, the idea never developed and bore fruit. Some- 
times it happens that a great discovery is nearly made, but the 
final stroke is not given in order fully to accomplish it. Often 
there is a glimmer of a new truth, but yet not clear enough 
for distinct assertion. 


Edward H. Gilbert communicated the memoir of the 
late Governor Daniel H. Chamberlain, the preparation of 
which had been assigned to him. 

The President communicated an invitation by the Com- 
mittee of the First Church in Boston to the Historical Society, 
to attend the exercises at the unveiling of the Memorial to 
John Cotton in its edifice on Berkeley Street. The Society 
adjourned at half-past three o'clock in order to allow the 
members to be present on that occasion. 

Volume XX. (second series) of the Proceedings, and a new- 
serial number containing the record of the June meeting, were 
ready for delivery at this meeting. 







Daniel Henry Chamberlain was born in the town of 
West Brookfield, Worcester County, Massachusetts, June 23, 
1835. His father was a farmer in moderate pecuniary circum- 
stances, of great firmness and even sternness of character, and 
his mother a woman of great intellectual force and religious 
culture. He was the ninth of ten children. All the children of 
the family showed an unusual degree of intelligence and marked 
force of character, two of the brothers being Rev. J. M. Cham- 
berlain of Iowa College, and Rev. L. T. Chamberlain, D.D., 
of New York. 

Until he was fourteen years of age Governor Chamberlain's 
life was passed in work on his father's farm, and in the com- 
mon schools of his native town. In 1849 and 1850 he spent 
a few months at the academy in Amherst, Massachusetts, 
beginning there his Latin and Greek ; and in 1854 he passed 
part of a year at Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachusetts, 
teaching school each winter from 1852. In 1856, at the age 
of twenty-one, he entered the High School in Worcester, 
Massachusetts, then under the charge of Homer B. Sprague 
and Wolcott Calkins, where, in 1857, he completed his prep- 
aration for college ; but being then without the money to go 
on, he remained a year as teacher in the same school. In 
1859 he entered Yale College. His college course was marked 
by great industry in all directions. In 1862 he was graduated 
with the highest honors in oratory and English composition ; 
while in general scholarship he held the fourth place in his 
class, which at graduation numbered one hundred and ten 

From the age of fifteen he was, in sentiment and sympathy, 
an abolitionist of the Garrison-Phillips type, though believing 




in political action and taking keen interest in the leaders and 
the triumphs of the political parties called Free-Soil and 

At New Haven, in 1860, he cast his first vote for Abraham 
Lincoln ; and on the breaking out of the Rebellion he was on 
the point of quitting college and entering the army, but was 
dissuaded by friends whose judgment he was bound to regard, 
and who urged that he could not afford to sacrifice his colle- 
giate course. Upon the completion of his college course he 
entered the Harvard Law School, where he remained but 
little more than a year, until the fall of 1863, when he could 
no longer resist the call to duty. 

Accordingly, obtaining the loan of $250 for that purpose 
from his instructor and friend, the late Professor Emory 
Washburn, he insured his life, and by the interest of the same 
good friend he received a lieutenant's commission in the Fifth 
Massachusetts Cavalry, a regiment of colored volunteers, then 
forming under the command of Colonel Henry S. Russell, of 
Boston, and under the special patronage of Governor John A. 
Andrew. He left for the seat of war in Virginia in the 
spring of 1864. His army life, until the end of hostilities, 
was spent at Point Lookout, Maryland, and in the Army of the 
James, at City Point, and before Petersburg. On the early 
morning of April 3, 1865, he entered Richmond with his 
regiment, then under command of Colonel Charles Francis 
Adams, Jr., now President of this Society. He passed the 
remainder of the year on the Rio Grande, with WeitzePs 
Corps, and in December, 1865, was mustered out at Boston. 

Early in January, 1866, he went to Charleston, South Caro- 
lina, to settle the affairs of a classmate, James Pierpont Blake, 
of New Haven, drowned at Edisto Island. While so engaged, 
he visited the Sea Islands near Charleston, where he was led 
to engage in cotton planting, in the hope of being enabled 
in this way to pay his college debts ; but the two years he 
spent in this occupation proved pecuniarily unsuccessful. In 
the fall of 1867 he was chosen a member of the Constitu- 
tional Convention called under the reconstruction acts, and 
took his seat in that body in January, 1868. He was a mem- 
ber of its Judiciary Committee, and was influential in all its 
deliberations. He so acquitted himself that all the friends of 
the new Constitution desired him to be one of the State officers 


to establish in practical operation the new organization of gov- 
ernment. The office of Attorney-General, being in the line of 
his chosen profession, was the only one he would consent to 
take ; and to this he w T as chosen, and held it for four years 
continuously. This Attorney-General, whose law studies had 
been prematurely broken off, who had never had a day's prac- 
tice in the courts, almost immediately found himself pitted 
against some of the foremost lawyers of a community always 
distinguished for the learning and ability of its Bar, in the trial 
of causes of great moment, involving the highest constitutional 
and legal questions, a strenuous endeavor being made to secure 
fulfilment of the prediction that the new State could not live. 
It was soon discovered by them that their inexperienced op- 
ponent was a man in whom it was not wise to presume any 
weakness that could be overcome by tireless industry and 
sound thinking. 

Attorney-General Chamberlain soon became the candidate 
of the Republican party for Governor ; and, elected in 1874, 
he held office until April 11, 1877. Those interested in the 
events of his troubled career as chief executive will find the 
story fully told in the narrative of his classmate and life-long 
friend Walter Allen, entitled " Governor Chamberlain's Admin- 
istration in South Carolina." The dramatic struggle of the 
closing days of his administration has become history, and is 
recounted in detail by Mr. Rhodes in the forty-fourth chapter 
of his History, as also in a paper read by Mr. Adams at the 
May meeting (1907) of the Society. 1 

After Governor Chamberlain's public life in South Carolina 
had come to its close, he entered a prominent law firm in New 
York City. He was engaged in conspicuous cases in the 
State courts and before the Supreme Court; but he had per- 
manently sapped his physical health in anxious public life, 
and illness with temporary disability came upon him. Obliged 
to give up, he travelled for a while for his health in Europe. 
He afterward accepted easier terms of professional work by 
taking the office of the receiver of the South Carolina railroad 
in behalf of the bondholders, and in that capacity he made his 
home temporarily in Charleston. He had very many devoted 
friends in South Carolina, not a few of them among those who 
had been his political opponents. But, the result of his over- 

i See ante, pp. 77-93. 


strenuous life showing itself further, he was peremptorily 
ordered by his physician to lead an easier existence. 

Returning to the home of his boyhood in West Brookfield, 
he settled upon the site of his birthplace, where he interested 
himself in his farming operations as well as in local affairs and 
history. Becoming one of the best informed antiquarians of 
his neighborhood and President of the Quaboag Historical 
Society, he continued his interest in such matters and in 
public affairs, writing much upon all these topics, until ill 
health drove him to less rigorous climates. He passed away 
at Charlottesville, Virginia, April 13, 1907. Governor Cham- 
berlain married, about the period of his public life in South 
Carolina, Miss Alice Cornelia Ingersoll, of Bangor, Maine, who 
died during the time of his New York practice. They had six 
sons, of whom two survive. 

The foregoing sketch forms the outline of the career of a 
man of singular brilliancy of mind and earnestness of charac- 
ter, who took a most prominent place in the trying times of 
reconstruction, and by common acknowledgment of friend and 
foe, never swerved from the path of duty and his idea of right. 
His whole history was marked by untiring industry, thorough- 
ness, and brilliancy, from his school days to his death. 

In the Worcester High School he, with his friend Walter 
Allen, later of the u Boston Daily Advertiser " and of the u Bos- 
ton Herald," founded a literary society, " The Eucleia," which 
still remains ; and a classmate of his in that school, James 
Green, says of him, " Old High School scholars will remem- 
ber that for a year or more Chamberlain was actually teaching 
in the school while he was reciting in the upper classes." 

In Yale he not only took high rank in scholarship, fourth in 
a class of one hundred and ten, but at the same time took the 
DeForest medal, the great prize of the course for English com- 
position and oratory, and he was elected the orator of his 
class at graduation, a very unusual combination of honors to 
be united in one individual. A Yale professor of that period 
declared that Chamberlain and John C. Calhoun had the most 
brilliant minds of all who had come under his notice. A class- 
mate has said of him, " He was easily the most influential leader 
of his class." 

Secretary Fairchild, a contemporary of Mr. Chamberlain in 


the Harvard Law School, has said he remembers him as the 
"ablest man in that school of his time"; but his career 
there was but brief. The following letter, written to a college 
friend, gives the reasons for his premature withdrawal from the 
institution : 

I am going to the war within the next two months. January, 1864, 
shall see me "enlisted for the war." I have no plans beyond that; 
do not know how or where I shall go, but go I must. I ought to have 
gone in '61, but the real reason I did n't was that I was then, as I am 
now, in debt for my college expenses to those who cannot possibly 
afford to lose what I have borrowed from them. I am told that it is 
foolish for me to go ; that I can do no more in the army than the less 
educated. I know all that, but years hence I shall be ashamed to have 
it known that for any reason I did not bear a hand in this life or death 
struggle for the Union and for Freedom. I find I can insure my life 
for enough to cover the $2000 I owe, and nothing shall hinder me 
longer than is necessary to get the money to do this. 

He was greatly interested in the Abolition movement, and 
took eveiy opportunity to hear the great speakers, such as 
Wendell Phillips and Garrison, — in fact he himself has said he 
must have heard Phillips speak in public more than fifty times ; 
and it was this intense interest in the cause of freedom and 
strong sense of duty and self-respect, as evidenced by the letter 
above, that drove him to seek a commission as lieutenant in the 
Fifth Massachusetts Cavalry in the way already described. 

The great and notable service of Governor Chamberlain's 
life, however, must be adjudged his administration of the offices 
of Attorney-General and Governor of the State of South Caro- 
lina from 1868 to 1877, with an interim when he was out of 
office from 1872 to 1874. 

It is not the purpose of this memoir to call in review his 
individual acts during that period, or to discuss the merits or 
demerits of the reconstruction policy under which he carried 
on his administration ; but it is certain that amidst the unfor- 
tunate and disgraceful events of that unhappy time, which 
were afterward so thoroughly opened to the light of day, no 
taint of dishonor or suspicion of peculation, or of what we 
have come to know as " graft," ever attached to him. 

The late Judge P. Emory Aldrich said of him, u In these 
trying [reconstruction] times Chamberlain's conduct has been 
as heroic as anything we have had in the war." 


The number is legion of the warmly appreciative and ad- 
miring letters and articles at his death, both from friends and 
bitter political foes, all testifying to his strict rectitude and 
high sense of duty. 

In numerous issues of its paper, the partisan and at that time 
politically hostile " News and Courier" testified to his upright- 
ness and ability. In January, 1875, it said he sent to his legis- 
lature a special message full of " wise, prudent, and just " 
recommendations ; also, in May of the same year, that he " is as 
true as steel, in the fight against public dishonesty. . . . It is due 
to Mr. Chamberlain that, for the first time in six years, there was 
no considerable stealing during the legislative session, and 
that not one swindling bill became a law." It spoke of " his 
scholarly messages, his patriotic utterances, his unfailing tact 
and courtesy." It also said : 

In the light of his acts, since he has been governor, we say now that, 
however much appearances were against him, it is morally impossible 
that he should have been either facile or corrupt. . . . Governor 
Chamberlain, therefore, richly deserves the confidence of the people of 
this State. The people of South Carolina, who have all at stake, who 
see and hear what persons outside of the State cannot know, are satis- 
fied of Governor Chamberlain's honesty. . . . When he determined to 
oppose a square front to corruption in whatsoever guise, he knew that 
he must, on that, cut loose from the rogues who ruled the Republican 
party up to the time of his election, and that upon him would be poured 
out the seventy and seven vials of wrath. It would have been supreme 
folly to provoke their hate if there was anything in his previous conduct 
that would expose him to ignominy and public shame. . . . By and with 
the aid of the Conservatives, Governor Chamberlain and the small band 
of honest Republicans defeated the thieves in every engagement. But 
the men whom he has thrown down, and who did not want or expect 
reform, are wild with rage and despair. 

And in an editorial two days after Governor Chamberlain's 
death it said : 

Once the judgment of the country was rendered against him Mr. 
Chamberlain never sought to reinstate himself as a political factor in 
the control of his State, but he never lost his interest in South Carolina 
and in the welfare of its people. . . . Though born in Massachusetts 
and reared and educated in the New England school of thought, he was 
loyal to South Carolina in the broadest way until the end came to him. 
Mr. Chamberlain was a very remarkable man. He was a scholar of 
the truest temper, a lover of his country of the broadest views, and at 


bottom he was always true, as we believe, to the highest welfare of his 
adopted State. New Englander by birth, he was a South Carolinian in 
spirit. . . . When he lay dying of an incurable malady, his thoughts 
were with the white people of South Carolina in the great honor which 
they paid to his successful antagonist of 1876. We sincerely deplore 
his death. 

A Georgia paper, also politically hostile, has said, in summing 
up his administration, " He was sincere in trying to evolve good 
government out of the impossible elements with which he was 

In Professor Dunning's " Reconstruction, Political and 
Economic," the twenty-second volume of Professor Hart's 
"American Nation," the writer says of him : 

In 1874 Daniel H. Chamberlain, a Massachusetts man of great elo- 
quence and ability, had been elected governor to succeed the unspeak- 
able Moses. By bold and spectacular proceedings he effected very con- 
siderable reforms in the State administration, incurriog thereby the 
vindictive animosity of the shameless crew in his own party whose 
vicious practices were interfered with. . . . Chamberlain was the only 
carpet-bagger governor in the South who had shown both the will and 
the ability to secure any measure of purity in State administration. 

Our associate Mr. Rhodes, while dwelling upon the universal 
corruption of the time, speaks of him in his " History of the 
United States " (New York, 1906, VII. 147, 167) as " an honest 
man who was Attorney-General of the State during the four 
years of Scott's administration," and later writes : 

" My highest ambition as governor," Chamberlain said, " has been to 
make the ascendancy of the Republican party in South Carolina com- 
patible with the attainment and maintenance of as high and pure a tone 
in the administration of public affairs as can be exhibited in the proudest 
Democratic State of the South." With the majority of his party 
against him, with its brutal rank and file blindly or selfishly tolerating 
their corrupt representatives, such a consummation could not be, as he 
himself years afterwards admitted. During his canvass in 1874 he 
had said : " The work of reform will be a constant struggle. . . , If in 
my two years as Governor I can even ' turn the tide,' I shall be more than 
rewarded." This indeed he accomplished. He began the redemption 
of South Carolina; it was completed under Democratic auspices. 

The most beautiful tribute of all, however, coming as it does 
from a once bitterly hostile political opponent, is the letter of 


Colonel A. C. Haskell, of Columbia, South Carolina, to the 
President of this Society, made a part of the paper already 
referred to as read at the May (1907) meeting. This letter, 
therefore, need not be quoted from here. None the less it 
makes duly apparent both the great difficulty of the times in 
which Governor Chamberlain labored, and the deep impression 
his character made upon the writer. 

Governor Chamberlain's espousal of the policy of recon- 
struction as inaugurated was sincere, and he strove with all 
his might to carry out its purpose ; but the policy itself and the 
tools with which he had to work were both impossible, as he 
himself subsequently realized. In the later years of his life 
he was an ardent civil-service reformer and anti-imperialist ; 
and it may well be that his unfortunate and trying experience 
in administering the laws honestly over a hostile and politically 
alien people with instruments thoroughly corrupt and unscru- 
pulous almost without exception, gave him, or at least inten- 
sified in him, a strong conviction of the absolute need of an 
honest civil service and of the utter impracticability and futility 
of our so-called imperialistic ventures. 

Of a nature that once having put his hand to the plough he 
could not turn back, in his administration in South Carolina 
he followed his line firmly and unswervingly unto the point 
where his position became impossible ; and then, in a quiet, 
dignified manner, he withdrew. 

He never forgot nor forgave the withdrawal of support from 
him by the national government in March, 1877, and truth- 
fully maintained that if he was not elected governor of South 
Carolina in 1876, then the Hayes presidential electors were 
not chosen, and President Hayes clouded his own title to the 
presidency by withdrawing his support. 

Although forced to curtail his energies in the more strenu- 
ous channels of life, he always maintained his interest in public 
affairs, and a constant comment thereon in the public prints 
showed to the last his great power of clear and trenchant 
criticism. He became a publicist. 

His scholarship was deep and genuine ; and, long after col- 
lege days, he read Demosthenes' orations and other classics, and 
Professor Lane's Latin Grammar, purely for mental pleasure 
and stimulus. 

President Woolsey, in a letter he gave young Chamberlain 



on leaving college, to be used in aiding him to gain a commis- 
sion in the army, used the expression regarding him, " a born 
leader of men." The University of South Carolina gave him 
the degree of LL.D. in 1873 ; and upon the foundation of the 
Law School of Cornell University he was appointed non-resident 
professor of constitutional law there. 

He retained his mental vigor to the end. During the last 
six months of his life, while facing sudden and inevitable 
death by hemorrhage, he never allowed his physical weakness 
and pain to overwhelm or diminish his intellectual activity, or 
dim the clearness of expression in his last utterances. In these 
closing months he composed several things that, under the cir- 
cumstances, can only be called remarkable. He wrote a fine 
appreciation of his old friend Walter Allen, and, in a well- 
known letter to the New York "World " of November 30,1906, 
scathing attack on District-Attorney Jerome for his failure to 
proceed with the indictment of life insurance officials. Opin- 
ions may differ as to the correctness of the strictures and 
denunciations in the article referred to, but it is certain that 
" no philippic ever proceeded in more orderly movement from 
beginning to end." 

It has been the good fortune of the writer of this memoir to 
see a production from the pen of Governor Chamberlain during 
this last period, not yet published, dealing with the problems 
of religion and immortality from his own point of view of that 
of one brought up in the extreme strictness and narrowness of 
the Calvinistic creed, who had come, after a long period of 
thought and study upon such subjects, to a radical and 
advanced position towards them. 

The article : much exceeds the limits of this memoir, but its 
simple and clear forms of expression and the painful and 
exhausted condition of the writer emphasize again his great 
activity and clearness of mental processes ; as also the indomi- 
table will and irresistible impulse of his high moral fibre, that 
caused him in those final days to rise superior to bodily ills, and 
forced him, having once become convinced of the truth, to 
proclaim it as he saw it. 

In closing this memoir, perhaps no higher characterization 

1 The paper has since been published in " The North American Review " 
(Vol. 186, No. 2, pp. 174-194) for October, 1907, under the title " Some Conclu- 
sions of a Free-thinker." — Eds. 


can be given of Governor Chamberlain's intensity of purpose, 
keenness of intellect, and high sense of public duty, than to 
describe in his own words, taken from a letter to his brother, 
the circumstances under which the Jerome letter was 
written : 

I did not let you know what I was doing, for I felt that you would 
thick me foolhardy, and could not blame you if you did. But I simply 
could nH give up my purpose. I little cared whether or not it killed 
me, and I was actually so weak that when I had partially raised myself 
on my pillow and had my pencil in my hand, I could only write a dozen 
or twenty words, and then give up exhausted and panting. I thus wrote 
during five long days, and then from my notes, undecipherable to any 
one but myself, I dictated it to a stenographer. What I did now seems 
incredible to myself. Considering the circumstances, I must think it 
the greatest feat of my life. I reckon that it shows how the spirit can 
triumph over the flesh. 

Mr. Chamberlain's strict integrity, his high ideals, and his 
untiring endeavor to attain them, raising him high among men, 
constitute his crown. 

The writer of this memoir wishes to acknowledge the great 
help he has received in its preparation from the writings of 
others, and the information given, especially by Rev. L. T. 
Chamberlain and Messrs. Paul C. Chamberlain, Charles Francis 
Adams, James Green, and, above all, the late Walter Allen, from 
whose book the sketch of Governor Chamberlain's life has been 
almost bodily taken. 



The stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 14th instant, 
at three o'clock, P. M.; the President in the chair. 

The record of the October meeting was read and approved ; 
and the Librarian read the list of donors to the Library during 
the past month. 

The Corresponding Secretary reported the receipt of a letter 
from Professor Pasquale Villari in response to a minute adopted 
at the October meeting. 

The Cabinet-Keeper reported the gift from the Cambridge 
Historical Society of their medal struck by Tiffany and Com- 
pany of New York, from a design by Bela L. Pratt, to com- 
memorate the centenary of the birth of Henry Wadsworth 
Longfellow. He also presented a medal of President Charles 
W. Eliot, designed by Leon Deschamps and struck at the 
French mint in 1907. 

The President reported that the Council had appointed the 
President, Edward Stanwood, and James Ford Rhodes a Com- 
mittee to publish the Proceedings of the Society, pending the 
choice of a permanent Editor to fill the vacancy caused by the 
resignation of Charles C. Smith. 

The President then said : 

As the chance concurrence of the ceremonies connected with 
the unveiling of the John Cotton Memorial with the date of 
our October meeting interfered with the regular order of our 
procedure at that meeting, the present is for all practical pur- 
poses our first meeting after the usual summer interim. The 
announcements which should have been made in October will 
be made to-day. 

So far as the Society is concerned, the occurrence of most 
considerable importance during the five months of intermission 
has been the resignation of our Editor. The Society will re- 
member that at our annual (April) meeting Mr. Smith declined 
re-election as Treasurer, retiring from the position held by him 


through so many years. Mr. Lord was then chosen his suc- 
cessor; while a recognition of the outgoing Treasurer's con- 
tinued and faithful services was spread upon our record. It 
appeared in the serial number of our Proceedings, laid upon 
the table at the October meeting. It was at the April meeting 
further intimated that Mr. Smith proposed to resign the posi- 
tion of Editor also. This he has since done in a letter dated 
June 1, thus closing another phase of service and term of long 
usefulness in connection with our Society. Mr. Smith's work 
as Editor began with his appointment by the Council on the 
14th of November, 1889, and has since been continuous, thus 
covering a period of nearly eighteen years. 

During those years, besides other services to the Society, 
Mr. Smith has edited thirteen volumes of our Collections, — 
from Vol. IV. of the Sixth Series to Vol. VI. of the Seventh 
Series, — ■ both inclusive. He has also brought out sixteen 
volumes of our Proceedings, from the fifth to the twentieth 
of the Second Series. An aggregate of no less than twenty- 
nine printed volumes have thus received his editorial care. 
He had previously been a member of the Committee to pub- 
lish the first and eighth volumes of our Fifth Series of Collec- 
tions, and the third volume of our Sixth Series, together with 
nine volumes — tenth to eighteenth — of our First Series of 
Proceedings, and two volumes of Early Proceedings (1791- 
1855), making in all no less than forty-three volumes, either 
edited by him exclusively or in co-operation with others. 

It hardly needs to be said that this record represents an 
amount of editorial work far exceeding, both in scope and 
value, that done by any other official or member ever con- 
nected with the Society. Mr. Smith's work, moreover, speaks 
for itself; painstaking, careful, accurate, suppressive of the 
editorial self, it has maintained the high standard traditionally 
borne by the publications of this Society. 

I am unwilling also to close this testimony of mine to the 
character of Mr. Smith's work without especial reference to 
the volume of our Proceedings placed on the table at our last 
meeting, — the twentieth, and closing volume of our Second 
Series. In its general make-up, in the nature and value of its 
contents, it is in my judgment the fitting consummation of Mr. 
Smith's editorial labors, — in all respects, a model of what a 
publication of that character should be. The historical inter- 


est of its contents is fully up to the mechanical excellence of 
the volume, and the editorial work is in keeping with both. 

It is needless to say that the resignation of Mr. Smith leaves 
a void in the Society's organization difficult to fill. Connected 
with the Society by long membership, he had not only a famil- 
iarity with its publications possessed by no other person, but 
his personal acquaintance with its past membership and his 
knowledge of its traditions were peculiar and unequalled. 
These cannot be transmitted. Most important and valuable 
factors in our peculiar editorial work, they disappear with him. 
In these respects the void occasioned by Mr. Smith's with- 
drawal cannot be made good in any successor. 

No new Editor has yet been decided on. The matter has, 
however, engaged, and is still engaging, the earnest attention 
of the Council, and a selection will, it is hoped, be made at a 
not remote day. 

It now devolves on me to announce to the Society vacancies 
in our several rolls of membership, since the June meeting, 
greater in number than, I believe, w r ere ever before announced 
at any single meeting. All caused by death, these vacancies, 
seven in all, have occurred in each of our rolls. Among our 
more immediate associates, Henry Gardner Denny, a member 
of the Society since the meeting of December 13, 1866, died 
in this city on the 19th of September ; John Elliot Sanford, a 
member since the January meeting, 1884, died at his residence 
in Taunton on the 11th of last month ; and, finally, Solomon 
Lincoln, a member since the November meeting, 1887, died 
in Boston four days later. 

Connected with the Society for over forty years, Mr. Denny, 
though recently incapacitated from active work and even 
from attendance, was long not only a useful member, as 
Cabinet-Keeper and in service rendered on the various com- 
mittees, but he was valuable as a contributor of historical 
matter. Chosen Cabinet-Keeper at the April meeting, 1868, he 
long filled that position. As Keeper he made six reports, all 
incorporated in our Proceedings, covering the years 1869 to 
1874, inclusive. In 1868 and in 1869 he prepared other reports 
for the Committee on the Memorials of the Antiquities of 
Boston ; and, in 1876, he made a report on the sale of Dr. 
Shurtleffs copy of the Bay Psalm Book. In 1891 he served 
on the Committee to audit the Treasurer's Accounts. His last 


participation in our meetings was a tribute to that estimable 
and interesting man, John Wilson, of the University Press, at 
the May meeting of 1903. He not infrequently took active 
part in our discussions ; his final attendance was at the April 
meeting of 1906. A Harvard graduate in the Class of 1852, 
Mr. Denny took his degree at the University Law School in 
1854. At his death his name stood, in order of seniority, fifth 
on our Resident roll. 

I shall presently call upon our associate Dr. Hale to pay 
tribute to Mr. Denny. The preparation of his memoir has 
been assigned to our associate Mr. Shaw. 

Of Mr. Sanford there is little to be said in connection with 
the Society. Chosen a member on general principles, as repre- 
senting Bristol County and the region in which he lived, he 
was an estimable man and useful citizen. Through a long 
series of years Mr. Sanford held many official positions of sec- 
ondary character ; but at no time did he identify himself with 
historical research, and I believe he never was present at 
more than one of our meetings. He certainty never served on 
any committee, nor, taking part in our discussions, contributed 
by so doing to our printed Proceedings. In 1891 he prepared 
a memoir of Rev. Henry M. Dexter. 

Third to die since the June meeting, Solomon Lincoln had 
been twenty years, lacking one month, a member of the 
Societ} r , and both a useful and an interested member. Elected 
in 1887, he in a way succeeded his father, after whom he was 
named, a member from January, 1845, to December, 1881. 
Not only was Mr. Lincoln to a certain extent the legal adviser 
of the Society, but through more than a dozen years he served 
on its committees, prepared reports, and otherwise interested 
himself in its work and well-being. Between 1892 and 1895 
he was a member of the Council, and in the last year prepared 
its report. One of the more constant attendants at our meet- 
ings, on November 9, 1899, he paid a tribute to his classmate 
and lifelong friend, John C. Ropes, and later, on October 9, 
1902, a similar tribute to Horace Gray. In 1902 he also pre- 
pared a memoir of Lincoln Flagg Brigham. Mr. Sanford and. 
Mr. Lincoln were, however, both of them men of a most im- 
portant and most useful type, — a type which constitutes in 
fact the saving element of our Anglo-Saxon community. Of 
education and ability, with a strong sense of self-respect and 


personal obligation, they were public-spirited and faithful ; 
above all, they were not eaten up with the craving for office 
and newspaper notoriety so unpleasantly characteristic of 
modern life. Useful citizens, they had character. 

Of Solomon Lincoln in particular I could otherwise say 
much, for he and I had been friends during more than half a 
century, since in fact we had been fellow students in Harvard. 
We were not, however, graduated in the same year, he being 
of the class of 1857, while I had preceded him by one year. 
Friends in college, we had remained friends always since. 
For his abilities, judgment and character I had a profound re- 
spect ; for him personally an affectionate regard. In my case 
his death has left a distinct sense of loss. I do not propose, 
however, to do more than refer to Mr. Lincoln here outside of 
his connection with the Society, but I shall presently call on 
his classmate, Governor Long, to pay fitting tribute to one 
whom he had known well in many capacities since they sat 
side by side on the college benches. 

The name of David Masson has now for thirteen years stood 
at the head of our Honorary roll ; and his election in 1871 
preceded by twenty-five years that of Mr. Bryce, who now takes 
the vacated leadership as respects seniority. Dr. Masson died 
at Edinburgh on the 7th of the present month. Born in 1822, 
he was, when made an Honorary Member, in his forty-ninth 
year ; but his reputation as an investigator was firmly estab- 
lished. Thirty years Professor of Rhetoric and English Liter- 
ature in Edinburgh University, he was, from 1853 to 1865, 
the successor of Professor Clough in the chair of English Lit- 
erature in the University College, London. Honorary Pro- 
fessor of Ancient History at the Royal Scottish Academy, in 
1893 he received the appointment of Historiographer Royal 
for Scotland. 

As an investigator and writer, Masson's name is inseparably 
connected with that of Milton, as author of the monumental 
work known as " The Life of John Milton : narrated in con- 
nexion with the Political, Ecclesiastical, and Literary History 
of his Time." The first volume of this publication, great in 
every sense, appeared in 1859, and the sixth and last in 1880. 
When I say that in its line this work is unique, I speak not from 
general report but as one having authority ; for some dozen or 
fifteen years ago I undertook to edit for the Prince Society a 


volume relating to the famous Antinomian controversy, which 
between 1636 and 1638 convulsed the infant colony of Massa- 
chusetts Bay. In so doing I, of course, had occasion to make 
use of Dr. Masson's work. 1 can only say it then impressed 
me as an almost inexhaustible mine of recondite learning. To 
read it as literature was, I should admit, impossible ; my recol- 
lection also is that it then lacked an index ; but in it, some- 
where, if the investigator had but patience to look, was 
everything relating to the period with which it dealt, and its 
controversies. It represents, in a word, an amount of learn- 
ing based on careful investigation of original material con- 
nected with a single individual and environment illustrative 
of the time in which that individual lived, which, so far as my 
knowledge goes, is without a parallel. Nor was this conclusion 
peculiar to me ; for, I remember, in one of the notes to his 
history, the late S. R. Gardiner, referring to some original 
material discovered by him in the archives, makes the asser- 
tion that, so far as he knew, it was the only bit of material of 
a similar character relating to that period which seemed to 
have escaped the prior search of Dr. Masson. His patience 
was inexhaustible ; his assiduity and capacity for labor knew 
no limit. Chosen an Honorary Member before the recent rule 
as respects our Honorary list 1 was established, Dr. Masson, 
nevertheless, as an historical writer and investigator, came 
strictly within both the letter and spirit of that rule. In the 
field of historical study his was an international reputation, 
recognized and unquestioned. 

In accordance with our present custom in the case of Honor- 
ary Members, I shall presently call on our associate Mr. 
Wendell to pay tribute to him. I had anticipated that Mr. 
Perry would also have had a word to add in this connection ; 
but he has not been able to attend to-day. 

Of our fifty Corresponding Members, the names of John 
Marshall Brown, chosen at the May meeting, 1879 ; John 
Andrew Doyle, chosen at the May meeting, 1887; and Sir 
Spencer Walpole, chosen at the December meeting, 1904, have 
disappeared from the roll as it stands in the recently published 
twentieth volume of our Proceedings. As the Society is 
aware, it is not usual to take special notice of the decease of 
Corresponding Members. Nevertheless, of those named, Mr. 

1 2 Proceedings, xv. 51-54; xx. 396. 



Doyle and Sir Spencer Walpole both rendered such conspicu- 
ous and valuable services in the historical line, and as the name 
of rne former is so connected with our early American annals, 
it seems proper that exception should in their cases be made. 
I shall therefore call upon Professor Edward Channing. of 
Harvard, and Dr. Rhodes, to pay brief tributes, the first to Mr. 
Doyle and the second to Sir Spencer Walpole. I will merely 
myself say, in connection with the latter, that I regard Sir 
Spencer Walpole as the highest authority of which I have 
knowledge on the extremely .intricate and very important 
European diplomatic complications of the period of our War of 
Secession, the years between 1660 and 1865. As bearing upon 
the important issue of European intervention in our internecine 
struggle, the full story of those complications has never yet 
been disclosed. I hope, at some future time, myself to contrib- 
ute towards a more intimate understanding of it. I will now 
only say that, should I succeed in so doing. I shall be mainly 
indebted for my success to the investigations of Sir Spencer 
Walpole and his " History of Twenty-five Years.'' Though for 
some time I carried on more or less correspondence with Sir 
Spencer, and he rendered me essential service in connec- 
tion with what I have written of the period and compli- 
cations referred to. I never met him personally. It was 
otherwise with Dr. Rhodes. Only most recently he was Sir 
Spencer's guest, having thus had an opportunity to observe 
him in his chosen and distinctive character of the English 
country gentleman. 

Edward E. Hale, having been called on first, read a 
tribute to Mr. Denny as follows : 

In the death of Henry Gardner Denny the Society loses a 
member who was profoundly interested in our work, and for 
manv years was an intelligent officer of the Society. 

There was every reason which the heredity people would 
assign for his interest in the hi-tory of Massachusetts. On his 
mother's side he descended directly from Henry Gardner, the 
first treasurer of the State of Massachusetts under the Con- 
stitution of 1780, as he had been since 1774 the only treasurer 
of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, from the moment when 
that Province parted company with George the Third. 

When Governor Gage dissolved the General Court of the 


Province, it formed itself into a Provincial Congress, and on 
October 28, 1774, appointed Henry Gardner of Stow to act as 
receiver-general and treasurer. It instructed the people of 
the Commonwealth to pay their taxes to him instead of to 
Harrison Gray, who was the royal treasurer. Since that 
memorable vote no taxes have been paid in Massachusetts 
to the English Crown. It would seem as if Henry Gardner 
might be called the. first person who by public act was in- 
structed to commit high treason against the King. This 
Henry Gardner had graduated at Harvard College in 1750, 
and later was representative of the town of Stow, in the 
western part of Middlesex County. In 1778 he removed 
to Dorchester in Massachusetts. I think he was always called 
" Treasurer Gardner." His son, Dr. Henry Gardner, of Dor- 
chester, was the grandfather of our friend. 

I have named his descent from the Gardners first because 
he bore their name. His father, Mr. Daniel Denny, was him- 
self a remarkable character in our Massachusetts history. 
Personally, I have reason for speaking of him with enthusiasm, 
because long before Henry Denny was born, when I was a 
little boy, I remember Daniel Denny in my father's house. For 
he was one of the little cluster of insane fanatics who believed 
with my father that what they called a railway was practica- 
ble and desirable between Boston and Albany. By people 
at large they were considered as madmen, and indeed were 
abused as such in public assemblies. As late as 1827 I find the 
following interesting passage in a report to the Massachusetts 
legislature : " A railway is a carriage road so formed that the 
wheels move on rails of any hard surface of iron, wood, or 
stone, instead of forming ruts or tracks." 

Mr. Daniel Denny was one of these insane men. It is the 
fashion now to speak of them as plutocrats who assume by 
their wealth the command of the resources of the country ; but 
they were not spoken of so then. He was born in Leicester, 
and was one of the old Leicester family of Denny, who from 
the early days were distinguished in the history of Worcester 

Mr. Henry G. Denny's mother, Harriet Joanna (Gardner) 
Denny, as I have said, was the daughter of Dr. Henry 
Gardner, who was the son of the treasurer. Mr. Denny, our 
associate, was the eldest son of Daniel Denny. He was born 


on June 12, 1833. He was fitted for Harvard College at the 
Chauncy Hall School, and in 1848, at the age of fifteen, he 
entered college. 

The class has distinguished itself in various walks of life, 
and I am glad to see present with us contemporaries who will 
testify to his life-long interest in the University. He was 
a member of Phi Beta Kappa, and the present members of that 
society will be eager to express their gratitude for his services 
in its varied administration. Almost from the moment of his 
graduation until he was disabled by illness of late years, he 
was ready for service in any line in which he could lift where 
he stood. He was utterly careless as to title or public reputa- 
tion ; if he could be of use, he made himself so. 

He studied law in the Law School and with the late Francis 
Watts. He was a member of the American Academy, of which 
Treasurer Gardner was one of the founders. Somebody said 
that for the generation of his active life, he was the Boston 
Library, — meaning that he watched over the interests of the 
old Boston Library in every detail and made it the admirable 
and important institution which it is. It would be almost im- 
possible to tell of how many philanthropic societies he was the 
careful and trusted treasurer. He was chosen into this Society 
in 1866 ; he was for many years our Cabinet-Keeper, and 
served on various committees. 

In the critical years before the Civil War he could be relied 
upon by the leaders in anti-slavery opinion for any service, 
private or public. I should find it hard to say when Henry 
Denny was at his best, but he was never more entertaining 
than he was if you could start him in private on describing 
the duties of young volunteers whose business it was to pro- 
tect Wendell Phillips and Lloyd Garrison at one and another 
public meeting. He was an active member of Salignac's drill 
corps through the war. I remember a phrase of his there 
when he was disappointed by some failure in the meeting of a 
company, " Let us drill in the manual ; no man was ever 
perfect enough in the manual," — a phrase which, whether true 
or not, gives a perfect illustration of the accuracy of his daily 

Mr. Denny, from early life, was a careful student of the 
English language. I do not quite understand why I find no 
printed papers of his in our own library or in our own trans- 


actions which would illustrate his interest in good English. 
His private library was especially strong in such English and 
American books as illustrate the growth of our language from 
Chaucer's time down. And that was a hardy man who dared 
enter into discussion with him on any matter of detail regarding 
spelling, or local habits, or what one might call the " annals " 
of the English language. His grief when the press failed in 
such matters was always amusing, and a young author was 
fortunate who could obtain his advice. There are almost un- 
numbered citations of his gifts to the Society in the indexes 
to our Proceedings. But one looks in vain for what he would 
be glad to find, — his vigorous and terse comments on written 
history or on passing events. 

John D. Long paid the following tribute to Mr. Lincoln : 

Solomon Lincoln, who was born in August, 1838, and who 
died last month, entered the class of 1857, at Harvard, at the 
beginning of its second year. From that time on to his grad- 
uation he and I sat side by side on the recitation benches, he 
preceding me in alphabetical order as he did in rank and 
date of birth. He quickly and easily rose to his level and, 
when Joseph May by reason of ill health left college in our 
senior year, became our first scholar. His characteristics then 
were his characteristics all through life, — well tempered, quick 
in apprehension, mature in character, of a singularly orderly 
habit, high-minded, a model of deportment yet full of humor 
and open to all the innocent and rational enjoyments and good 
times of life, winning the absolute confidence of associates and 
authorities, and equal to whatever trust or duty came to him. 
I recall him at that time, short and fair, a handsome youth 
with frank face and honest eyes and always a bearing that 
united personal dignity with courteous and kindly manner. 
He had a mind that worked with easy and accurate directness 
to results and achievement. I should not say that he was a 
hard student in the sense of a dig or grind, if I may use those 
college phrases, but a masterful and sure one, always superior 
to his task and giving himself the broader range which made 
him socially a delightful and contributory comrade. And his 
life was pure as crystal. 

I see before me now that picture of the ideal youth. I see 
another, the same picture but enlarged and developed, — the 


man in the prime of life, active in his profession, — charged 
with large interests and trusts as a leader at the bar and 
with the wider responsibilities which are put upon the wise 
and trusted citizen who does not seek, but is sought for, 
posts in civic and social life. His special distinction was in 
his career as a lawyer. In this he rose to the heights. He 
had eminently a judicial mind and was a thorough student 
and master of the law. I had the honor to offer him a place 
on the bench. Had he accepted it, it is in my mind beyond 
question that he would have been promoted to the supreme 
judicial court and would later have served and died as its 
chief. His range of practice was large. He was counsel for 
some of our largest corporate interests at a time, which I trust 
may return, when nobody questioned the respectability of em- 
ployment by a corporation. He was recognized as an especially 
wise and safe adviser in chambers. He was also one of the 
most busily engaged advocates before juries and the judges. In 
this arena his example was a liberal education to other prac- 
titioners, to not only the younger men but men of his own age 
and length of professional life. To him and some contempo- 
raries like him are due the better than the old manners of the 
bar, the more courteous conduct of cases and the transition 
from the brutal treatment of witnesses and the repulsive bick- 
ering between opposing counsel, which at one time were re- 
garded as the mark of the smart and popular lawyer. 

His manner was always that of a gentleman. He was 
straightforward, earnest, and honest. His preparation was 
complete both in the law and in the facts. There was no 
subterfuge or trick or sharp practice. His adversary's rights 
were safe in his hands, but his adversary's defence must be 
well guarded and strong in order to escape his thoroughness 
and fidelity to his cause. No client ever had more loyal or 
painstaking counsel. As a natural result, he ranked high in 
the small group of not only the leading but the best lawyers 
in every sense of the word. 

He was for years president of the Bar Association. His 
name was a synonym for the ideals of his profession. Alas, 
that in that profession, so vital an element in the complicated 
relations of life, its brightest ornaments are so soon forgotten, 
and that, if you or I were to name even at a bar meeting any 
one of the leaders of the bar fifty years ago, whose fame was 



then on everybody's lips, whose arguments attracted great 
crowds, and the scintillations of whose wit were quoted like 
household words, it would be to most of our hearers as un- 
known and as unmeaning as if it were a name on a selectman's 
door plate in the North End of Boston a century ago ! 

And I recall the picture of Solomon Lincoln as we saw him 
in his seventh decade, sitting in this room, one of our fellow 
members. And yet I do not recall him more freshly than 
before, for memory is an annihilator of time as the electric 
current is of space. Under its magic the mind's eye sees all 
the past in one photograph with the present, still living and 
fresh and now and here. So the figure before me is still one 
and the same, the youthful classmate, the mature and active 
lawyer, the veteran retiring from the battle front to these 
cloisters of historic quiet and occupation-seeking leisure. In 
these latter days bodily infirmities had sapped his physical 
strength, though leaving unimpaired the attractive face, the 
genial manner, the conversational cordiality and interest. In 
these latter years, too, he had let go the former absorbing hold 
of professional duties. Partly in search of health, largely in 
pursuit of more varied and cosmopolitan knowledge of men 
and the world, he had travelled extensively through Europe, in 
Egypt (in which he specially delighted), and through our own 
West and Pacific coast. 

Even in his most active professional days his life was not 
narrow, and he did not fail to render the service due from the 
good citizen. He never gave himself to a political career in 
the way of holding political office ; and yet few men were more 
vitally interested in the political questions and exactions of 
the day. He had very decided convictions in this respect. 
He was not a hanger on the fence. He was an unusually de- 
voted and loyal party man, a stanch Republican, and argued 
his party's case strenuously and sometimes with intense 

He served on the staff of Governor Talbot, to whom he was 
also a wise and influential counsellor. It is not for me to give 
the detailed statistics of the places he filled, or indeed of his 
general career; but I cannot refrain, in sight of these shelves 
rich with historic treasures, from referring to his long service 
as one of the trustees of the Boston Public Library. He was 
president of the Unitarian Club, thereby expressing his sym- 


pathy with the liberal religious faith in which he was born and 
reared, and with its steadily liberalizing and more and more 
free, untrammelled thought. He was for many terms president 
of the Board of Overseers of Harvard College, in which, after 
his graduation therefrom, lie had been an instructor. 

In the social life of Boston he was a charm and a con- 
tributor. Many a circle recalls his rare combination of sound 
sense, large culture, and happy humor. At our Jacobite Club, 
— a club of some of his classmates named for its founder, our 
former member here, John Codman Ropes, clarum nomen, — he 
was delightful in his reminiscences of college life. He rein- 
vested them with the old phrases and tones, notably those of 
dear old Dr. Walker, president of the college in our time. 
And not only his reminiscences, but his comments on current 
men and things, and his part in the lively discussions which of 
course always arose on current men and things, were marked 
by that singular directness and good sense and wholesome 
view which were characteristic of him. 

He was not a brilliant man in the pyrotechnic sense or per- 
haps in a less resplendent sense, but he was all aglow with the 
steady and unflickering flame of a mind that always blazed 
clear. He was not an eloquent advocate in the sense of the 
thundering orator or scintillating rhetorician, but his speech 
was convincing and went straight to the heart of the issue. 
He never put himself in the lime-light of a popular figure, but 
he was an unfailing influence for good and wholesome things, 
and the world was better for his part in it. He was singularly 
free from anything smacking of sensationalism or claptrap. 
Some good men offend you by the apparent consciousness on 
their own part of their virtues and of the favor they bestow 
upon you in giving you an opportunity to observe them. 
There was nothing of this sort in Lincoln. One of the quaint 
rural philosophers of my boyhood in Maine — an inglorious 
but not mute Shakespeare rather than Milton — used to say 
of any person whom he regarded as a man of worth, " He was 
born right." Lincoln in his commendable career and example 
was simply giving unconscious expression to the natural quali- 
ties of his mind and heart. 

His home, his domestic life, that great living-room of his, 
with its wealth of books, its rare pictures on the wall, and its 
notable collection of photographs gathered during native and 


foreign travel and illustrative of European, Egyptian, oriental, 
and insular scenes, and reproducing distant clime, landscape, 
costume, and building, — all these and that hospitable table, 
around which it has been the delight of so many to sit in 
converse and comradeship, attest the memory of a private life 
radiant, liberal, refined, without a stain, the outcome of a pure 
heart and clean hands. 

A native of Hingham, he inherited the flavor of that ancient 
town and community, and was a Puritan with the Puritan's 
virtues and none of the Puritan's narrowness. His ancestors 
of his own famous name of Lincoln were among its very first 
settlers. His father was its leading citizen, historian of the 
town, and the son came naturally by historical tastes which 
attracted him to this Society. The father delivered the oration 
at the celebration of the two hundredth anniversary of the in- 
corporation of the town ; the son at that of the celebration of 
the two hundred and fiftieth. 

It was an all-round life, the full corn in the ear. It certainly 
was a fortunate and blessed life in its birth, its education, its 
work, its fruition. Some of you were present in the room to 
which I have referred, when the last tributes were paid to him. 
There he lay at rest, embowered in flowers, silent but still with 
us. The funeral service, the best ordered perhaps because the 
simplest I ever attended, was in keeping with the man. A 
room full of friends gathered, not in a chilling temple but 
around him in his home, into the windows of which the sun- 
light streamed. A fitting prayer from the lips of his pastor, 
so impressive in figure and voice and octogenarian years, so 
fertile and versatile, — a living statue, in the flesh, of the 
Massachusetts Minute-man of our time, — Edward Everett 
Hale ; and then a few verses, recited by the younger associate 
minister, from the " Eternal Goodness" of Whittier, — the one 
poet who has best and most enduringly embodied the spiritual 
and household heart of New England. Simplicity and sincerity 
were the best eulogy of the man, because they were the man 

I join, Mr. President, gratefully in the tribute which you and 
all here pay to the memory of this our beloved fellow member. 

Barrett Wendell followed with a tribute to Professor 
Masson : 



On the 15th of August, 1871, a stated meeting of this So- 
ciety was held, postponed from the 10th in order to celebrate 
the one hundredth anniversary of the birthday of Sir Walter 
Scott, formerly an Honorary Member. At this meeting " David 
Masson, A.M., of Edinburgh, author of the new Life of Milton, 
was elected a Corresponding Member." Few chances could 
have been happier than that which thus associates Masson, in 
our records, at once with the greatest master of Scottish letters 
and with his own most surely enduring work. 

At that time he was nearly fifty years old. Born at Aber- 
deen, on the 2d of December, 1822, and educated first at 
Marischal College there, and later at Edinburgh, under Dr. 
Chalmers, he had already had a wide and varied career, — as 
editor of the " Free Kirk Banner " at Aberdeen, as a literary as- 
sociate of the Chamberses in Edinburgh, as a general man of 
letters in London, where his sympathy with liberty had made 
him for a while Secretary of the " Friends of Italy," as the suc- 
cessor of Arthur Hugh Clough in the chair of English literature 
at University College, London, and as the first editor of " Mac- 
millan's Magazine," an excellent periodical which came to its 
end in the very year when he died. For six years before his 
election to this Society he had been the successor of Sir Wil- 
liam Edmonstoune Aytoun in the chair of Rhetoric and Eng- 
lish Literature at the University of Edinburgh. 

Yet the " new Life of Milton," in recognition of which he was 
elected here, had by no means reached completion. The first 
volume had appeared in 1859 ; the second had only just come 
out in 1871. The work was not fully finished until 1880. 
Meanwhile, in March, 1875, when he is recorded not as A.M. 
but as LL.D., his name had been transferred frOm our Corre- 
sponding to our Honorary list. Since the death of Froude, in 
October, 1894, he stood at the head of this list. 

Few if any of the present members of the Society have per- 
sonally known him. To us he was an eminent man of letters. 
He was the author of many works of which we had no very 
clear impression, — among them essays on a wide variety of sub- 
jects, and authoritative books on Chatterton and on Drummond 
of Hawthornden ; and — what associated him somewhat more 
closely with New England — he was the editor of the stand- 
ard edition of the works of Thomas De Quincey, whose 
writings, if I mistake not, had first been collected by our 


fellow-townsman, the late James T. Fields. Supremely, how- 
ever, Masson remained what he had already shown himself in 
1871, — the final biographer of Milton. 

His great work, as it rounded into its portentous bulk, 
proved to be, and will probably remain, one of the three great 
though dissimilar works which will record in monumental liter- 
ature the history of England during the seventeenth century. 
Almost, if not quite, it bridges the gap between Gardiner and 
Macaulay. Though it lack something of the unswerving pre- 
cision of the one, and of the fervid brilliancy of the other, it 
has at the same time, together with its discursive individuality, 
a touch of both these qualities. It is quite as much a picture 
of the times of Milton as it is the story of his life. Yet Milton 
remains the central figure throughout its six solid volumes. 
And this is why there has been such peculiar fitness in the fact 
of Masson's standing for so long as the eldest Honorary Mem- 
ber of this Society ; for of all the great masters of English liter- 
ature none comes so near as Milton to that type of character 
from which the most vital traditions of New England have 
been derived. 

Though to us, across seas, Masson was chiefly a great 
historical biographer, his work as a professor perhaps more in- 
stantly appealed to those who knew him in Edinburgh. Eng- 
lish literature has been neglected by the great universities 
of England. In Scotland, as in Continental Europe and in 
America, it is regarded as a subject of full academic dignity ; 
and Masson, as the chief professor of it in Scotland, was rec- 
ognized, I think, as the chief in the English-speaking world. 

Among his pupils was my colleague, Professor William 
Allan Neilson, of Harvard University. He has had the kind- 
ness to send me some notes of his memories, which I shall 
venture to put dowm here : 

For thirty years he lectured every afternoon to a large body of 
students, devoting the remainder of his energy to the production of 
those works of solid and enduring scholarship which have brought him 
fame. As a teacher, Masson was a memorable and impressive figure, 
regarded by the younger generations of Edinburgh alumni with pro- 
found reverence and affection. In this field it was his personality, 
more than his learning, which told, — a personality as rugged and 
massive as the granite of his native hills. The intensity of his appre- 
ciation of the greater figures in literature, the order of his patriotism 


and the warmth of his genial humor, brought forth from time to time 
bursts of eloquence which remain in the minds of many as the most 
vivid memories of their college days. . . . 

In physical appearance Masson came more and more to bear a 
striking resemblance to his friend and fellow-countryman, Thomas 
Carlyle. In their writings there is more than a superficial resemblance 
of style : they had in common a passion for truth, a capacity for enor- 
mous labor in the search for it, and a large share of the preferred 
genius of their race in the defence of it. In Masson's death literature 
and history in Scotland lose their veteran representative. 

One final anecdote may remind as of how fortunate the 
choice of Scott's centenary was for Masson's election here. 
At least in his later years, they say, he was accustomed to 
read his lectures from manuscripts written out once for all. 
The bursts of eloquence, I take it, were frequently inter- 
spersed. In one of his lectures, however, when he touched 
on Scott, I have been told, he regularly broke off, year by 
year, with some such words as these: "And at this point 
I am accustomed to remark that if I could live forever I 
should ask for no happier eternity than one gladdened by 
a perpetual series of Waverley Novels." 

Edward Channing spoke as follows : 

Mr. President, it was a very happy idea on your part to 
break through our ordinary practice, as to Corresponding 
Members, and to spread upon our records an appreciation of 
John Andrew Doyle's labors in our special field. Like so 
many subjects of Queen Victoria interested in American his- 
tory, Doyle was not an Englishman, but was of Irish descent. 
In casting about as to why he should have interested himself 
in American history, his racial origin seemed perhaps to be one 
of the reasons. Mr. Doyle's father was the editor of " The Lon- 
don Chronicle" for a great many years, and his mother was 
the daughter of the proprietor of that paper. The Chronicle 
in the eighteenth century — the predecessor, of course, of 
the Chronicle of the Doyle period — -was a nonconformist 
paper, and was singularly taken up with American affairs. 
It may be that the connection of the Doyle family with the 
Chronicle was what turned his attention to American history. 
At all events, in 1869 Mr. Doyle won the Arnold prize at 


Oxford. This essay was printed in that year, the subject being 
" The American Colonies Previous to the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence." I think it is very interesting to notice that Mr. 
Doyle — a student at Oxford who had never been in America at 
that time, and had, so far as I know, no American roots of any 
sort — should have taken that subject for his prize essay; pos- 
sibly it may have been assigned to him. At all events, it was a 
happy chance that turned him in the direction of the history of 
our growth. From that time to his death he spent all his life, 
or a very large part of it, in studying and writing about our 
early annals. He printed five volumes on the history of Amer- 
ican colonies, the first volume being on " Virginia, Maryland, 
and the Carolinas," followed, in 1887, by two volumes on " The 
Puritan Colonies," which in turn were followed, within the 
last twelve months, by a volume on u The Middle Colonies " and 
one on " The Colonies under the House of Hanover." 

Mr. Doyle's two volumes on " The Puritan Colonies " are a 
remarkable piece of work. That an Englishman who had 
never been in this country except for a few weeks could 
have got hold of the spirit of New T England colonization 
and New England thought in the way he did, is very note- 
worthy. Mr. Doyle's two volumes on the New England colo- 
nies are one of the very best studies that we have on the subject. 
He had the use of the documents in the State Paper Office in 
London, and also of the papers in the Bodleian Library at 
Oxford. He added something to our store of knowledge 
from original sources, but not very much. The important 
thing about his work is the comment and the treatment of 
our history from an outside standpoint. I think Mr. Doyle 
did a great service in that way. As an Englishman, a mem- 
ber of the Established Church, and Librarian of All Souls 
College in Oxford, he took a view of New England history 
which none of us can take ; and it is very good that that view 
should have been perpetuated in book form. 

Mr. Doyle had some of the idiosyncrasies of English writers. 
Among other things, he used certain sets of books, and then 
did not use certain other sets, in the way which English 
students do, but which is to us very puzzling. He studied 
our Collections with great faithfulness, but in writing these 
volumes did not look into our Proceedings at all. He 
used Winthrop's "History," but made no use whatever of 


the Boston Records. From the point of view of a descend- 
ant of Thomas Dudley and Anne Bradstreet, the result was 
to give a Winthropian cast to Massachusetts history which is 
somewhat distressing. That, I think, is the greatest failing of 
Mr. Doyle's books on New England. Otherwise they are good, 
wholesome reading for any New Englander. 

The last two volumes of Mr. Doyle's works have not held 
the place of the New England volumes. When I read them, 
last spring, I came across a note, — one of the foot-notes to a 
page, — " Here I regret to say that, as in two previous in- 
stances, I have mislaid my references." It then occurred to 
me that Mr. Doyle must be approaching his end. He had evi- 
dently looked for the reference and had not found it, and 
thought it necessary to say that he could not find it; but this 
honesty was characteristic of the man. 

Mr. Doyle contributed numberless notices of American books 
to the " English Historical Review," and wrote many of the 
articles on American Colonists for the " Dictionaiy of National 
Biography." He kept us before the English historical public 
as no one else has done in recent years. He was the prin- 
cipal writer in the volume on the United States in " The Cam- 
bridge Modern History." The book, however, that I would 
like to call attention to in closing is none of these, and proba- 
bly is one that most of you here have not seen, — his " History 
of the United States " in that most arid series of histories 
edited by Edward A. Freeman, which began with a "General 
Sketch " by Mr. Freeman himself. Doyle's book covers the 
whole period of United States history, and it is such a good 
statement, — it is dry, fearfully dry, — but it is such a good 
statement of our history, the facts are given with such appre- 
ciation and generally with such accuracy, that the students of 
American history in Harvard University have literally used up 
the copy of that book in its library. Part of the volume has 
disappeared bodily. It seems to me that this is the greatest 
tribute perhaps that can be paid to John Andrew Doyle's 
scholarly knowledge of the history of our country. 

James F. Rhodes read an estimate of Sir Spencer 
Walpole : 

Sir Spencer Walpole was an excellent historian and indus- 
trious writer. His first important work, entitled " The History 


of England " from 1815, was published at intervals from 1878 
to 1886 ; the first instalment appeared when he was thirty- 
nine years old. This in six volumes carried the history to 
1858 in an interesting, accurate, and impartial narrative. 
Four of the five chapters of the first volume are entitled 
" The Material Condition of England in 1815," " Society in 
England," " Opinion in 1815," " The Last of the Ebb Tide," 
and they are masterly in their description and relation. Dur- 
ing the Napoleonic wars business was good. The develop- 
ment of English manufactures, due largely to the introduction 
of steam as a motive power, was marked. " Twenty years of 
war," he wrote, "had concentrated the trade of the world 
in the British Empire." Wheat was dear ; in consequence 
the country gentlemen received high rents. The clergy, being 
largely dependent on tithes, — the tenth of the produce, — had 
their incomes increased as the price of corn advanced. But 
the laboring classes, both those engaged in manufactures and 
agriculture, did not share in the general prosperity. Either 
their wages did not rise at all or did not advance commensu- 
rate with the increase of the cost of living and the decline in 
the value of the currency. Walpole's detailed and thorough 
treatment of this subject is historic work of high value. 

In the third volume I was much impressed with his account 
of the Reform Act of 1832. We all have read that wonderful 
story over and over again, but I doubt whether its salient 
points have been better combined and presented than in Wal- 
pole's chapter. I had not remembered the reason of the selec- 
tion of Lord John Russell to present the bill in the House 
of Commons when he was only Paymaster of the Forces with- 
out a seat in the Cabinet. It will of course be recalled that 
Lord Grey, the Prime Minister, was in the House of Lords, 
and, not so readily I think, that Althorp was Chancellor of 
the Exchequer and the leader of the House of Commons. 
On Althorp, under ordinary circumstances, it would have 
been incumbent to take charge of this highly important meas- 
ure, which had been agreed upon by the Cabinet after counsel 
with the King. Russell was the youngest son of the Duke 
of Bedford ; and the Duke was one of the large territorial 
magnates and the proprietor of rotten boroughs. "A bill 
recommended by his son's authority," wrote Walpole, " was 
likely to reassure timid or wavering politicians." " Russell," 


Walpole continued, " told his tale in the plainest language. 
But the tale which he had to tell required no extraordinary 
language to adorn it. The Radicals had not dared to expect, 
the Tories, in their wildest fears, had not apprehended, so 
complete a measure. Enthusiasm was visible on one side 
of the House ; consternation and dismay on the other. At 
last, when Russell read the list of boroughs which were 
doomed to extinction, the Tories hoped that the completeness 
of the measure would ensure its defeat. Forgetting their 
fears, they began to be amused and burst into peals of 
derisive laughter" (Vol. III. p. 208). 

Walpole's next book was the " Life of Lord John Russell," 
two volumes published in 1889. This was undertaken at the 
request of Lady Russell, who placed at his disposal a mass of 
private and official papers and "diaries and letters of a much 
more private nature." She also acceded to his request that 
she was not to see the biography until it was ready for publi- 
cation, so that the whole responsibility of it would be Wal- 
pole's alone. The Queen gave him access to three bound 
volumes of Russell's letters to herself, and sanctioned the pub- 
lication of certain letters of King William IV. Walpole wrote 
the biography in about two years and a half; and this, con- 
sidering that at the time he held an active office, displayed 
unusual industry. If I may judge the work by a careful 
study of the chapter on " The American Civil War," it is 
a valuable contribution to political history. 

Passing over three minor publications, we come to Walpole's 
" History of Twenty-five Years," two volumes of which were 
published in 1904. A brief extract from his preface is note- 
worthy, written as it is by a man of large intelligence, with 
great power of investigation and continuous labor and pos- 
sessed of a sound judgment. After a reference to his " History 
of England" from 1815, he said : " The time has consequently 
arrived when it ought to be as possible to write the History 
of England from 1857 to 1880, as it was twenty years ago to 
bring down the narrative of that History to 1856 or 1857. 
... So far as I am able to judge, most of the material which 
is likely to be available for British history in the period with 
which these two volumes are concerned [1856-1870] is already 
accessible. It is not probable that much which is wholly new 
remains unavailable." I read carefully these two volumes 


when they first appeared and found them exceedingly fascinat- 
ing. Palmerston and Russell, Gladstone and Disraeli, are 
made so real that we follow their contests as if we ourselves 
had a hand in them. A half dozen or more years ago an 
Englishman told me that Palmerston and Russell were no 
longer considered of account in England. But I do not 
believe one can rise from reading these volumes without being 
glad of a knowledge of these two men whose patriotism was 
of a high order. Walpole's several characterizations, in a 
summing up of Palmerston, display his knowledge of men. 
" Men pronounced Lord Melbourne indifferent," he wrote, 
" Sir Robert Peel cold, Lord John Russell uncertain, Lord 
Aberdeen weak, Lord Derby haughty, Mr. Gladstone subtle, 
Lord Beaconsfield unscrupulous. But they had no such 
epithet for Lord Palmerston. He was as earnest as Lord 
Melbourne was indifferent, as strong as Lord Aberdeen was 
weak, as honest as Lord Beaconsfield was unscrupulous. Sir 
Robert Peel repelled men by his temper ; Lord John Russell 
by his coldness ; Lord Derby offended them by his pride ; Mr. 
Gladstone distracted them by his subtlety. But Lord Pal- 
merston drew both friends and foes together by the warmth of 
his manners and the excellence of his heart" (Vol. I. p. 525). 

Walpole's knowledge of continental politics was apparently 
thorough. At all events, if one desires two entrancing tales, 
let him read the chapter on " The Union of Italy," of which 
Cavour and Napoleon III. are the heroes; and the two 
chapters entitled " The Growth of Prussia and the Decline 
of France " and " The Fall of the Second Empire." In these 
two chapters Napoleon III. again appears, but Bismarck is 
the hero. Walpole's chapter on " The American Civil War " 
is the writing of a broad-minded, intelligent man, who could 
look on two sides. 

Of Walpole's last book, " Studies in Biography," published 
in 1907, 1 have left myself no time to speak. If any one is in- 
terested in it, let him read the review of it in " The Nation " early 
this year, which awards it high and unusual commendation. 

The readers of Walpole's histories may easily detect in them 
a treatment not possible from a mere closet student of books 
and manuscripts. A knowledge of the science of government 
and of practical politics is there. For Walpole was of a po- 
litical family. He was of the same house as the great Whig 



Prime Minister Sir Robert ; and his father was Home Secre- 
tary in the Lord Derby ministry of 1858, and again in 1866, 
when he had to deal with the famous Hyde Park meeting of 
July 23. On his mother's side he was a grandson of Spencer 
Perceval, the Prime Minister who in 1812 was assassinated in 
the lobby of the House of Commons. Walpole's earliest pub- 
lication was a biography of Perceval. 

And Spencer Walpole himself was a man of affairs. A clerk 
in the War Office in 1858, private secretary to his father in 
1866, next year Inspector of Fisheries, later Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor of the Isle of Man, and from 1893 to 1899 Secretary to 
the Post-Office. In spite of all this administrative work his 
books show that he was a wide, general reader, apart from his 
special historical studies. He wrote in an agreeable literary 
style, with Macaulay undoubtedly as his model, although he 
was by no means a slavish imitator. His " History of Twenty- 
five Years " seems to me written with a freer hand than the 
earlier history. He is animated by the spirit rather than the 
letter of Macaulay. I no longer noticed certain tricks of ex- 
pression which one catches so easily in a study of the great 
historian, and which seem to fit so well Macaulay's own work, 
but that of nobody else. 

An article by Walpole on my first four volumes, in the " Edin- 
burgh Review" of January, 1901, led to a correspondence which 
resulted in an invitation last May to pass Sunday with him at 
Hartfield Grove, his Sussex country place. We were to meet 
at Victoria Station and take an early morning train. Seeing 
Mr. Frederic Harrison the day previous, I asked for a personal 
description of his friend Walpole in order that I might easily 
recognize the gentleman whom I had never met. " Well," says 
Harrison, " perhaps I can guide you. Awhile ago I sat next to 
a lady during a dinner who took me for Walpole and never 
discovered her mistake until addressing me as Sir Spencer I 
undeceived her just as the ladies were retiring from the table. 
Now I am eight years older, and I don't think I look like 
Walpole, but that good lady had another opinion." Walpole 
and Harrison met that Saturday evening at the Academy 
dinner, and Walpole obtained a personal description of myself. 
This caution on both our parts was unnecessary. We were 
the only historians travelling down on the train and could not 
possibly have missed one another. I found him a thoroughly 


genial man, and after fifteen minutes in the railway carriage we 
were well acquainted. The preface to his " History of Twenty- 
five Years" told that the two volumes were the work of five 
years. I asked him how he was getting on with the succeed- 
ing volumes. He replied that he had done a good deal of 
work on them, and now that he was no longer in an adminis- 
trative position he could concentrate his efforts and he expected 
to have the work finished before long. I inquired if the promi- 
nence of his family in politics hampered him at all in writing 
so nearly contemporary history, and he said, " Not a bit." An 
hour of the railroad and a half-hour's drive brought us to his 
home. It was not an ancestral place, but a purchase not many 
years back. An old house had been remodelled with modern 
improvements, and comfort and ease were the predominant 
aspects. Sir Spencer proposed a "turn" before luncheon, 
which meant a short walk, and after luncheon we had a real 
walk. I am aware that the English mile and our own are 
alike 5280 feet, but I am always impressed with the fact that 
the English mile seems longer, and so I was on this Sunday. 
For after a good two hours' exertion over hills and meadows 
my host told me that we had gone only five miles. Only by 
direct question did I elicit the fact that had he been alone he 
would have done seven miles in the same time. 

There were no other guests, and Lady Walpole, Sir Spencer, 
and I had all of the conversation at luncheon and dinner and 
during the evening. We talked about history and literature, 
English and American politics and public men. He was sin- 
gularly well informed about our country, although he had 
only made one brief visit and then in an official capacity. 
English expressions of friendship are now so common that I will 
not quote even one of the many scattered through his volumes, 
but he displayed everywhere a candid appreciation of our good 
traits and creditable doings. I was struck with his knowledge 
and love of lyric poetry. Byron, Shelley, Keats, Tennyson, 
Longfellow, and Lowell were thoroughly familiar to him. He 
would repeat some favorite passage of Keats, and at once turn 
to a discussion of the administrative details of his work in the 
Post-Office. Of course the day and evening passed very 
quickly, — it was one of the days to be marked with a white 
stone, — and when I bade Walpole good-bye on the Monday 
morning 1 felt as if I were parting from a warm friend. I 


found him broad-minded, intelligent, sympathetic, affable, and 
he seemed as strong physically as he was sound intellectually. 
His death on Sunday, July 7, of cerebral hemorrhage was alike 
a shock and a grief. 

The President reported, for the Council, that Samuel S. 
Shaw had been appointed to write a memoir of Henry G. 
Denny; Morton Dexter, a memoir of John E. Sanford; John 
D. Long, a memoir of Solomon Lincoln ; and Edward Stan- 
wood, a memoir of Peleg W. Chandler. 

The President called attention to a bust of George Bancroft 
by R. S. Greenough, which had been placed on the table to be 
presented at the next meeting of the Society; and he announced 
that M. A. De Wolfe Howe, through whose exertions it had been 
secured, would then give the curious history of its discovery. 

Edward Stanwood communicated for Albert Matthews, 
who was absent, the following paper : 

Documents in a File of the Boston News-Letter (1711— 
1715) in the Boston Athenaeum. 

Having recently had occasion to examine with some thor- 
oughness Boston newspapers between 1704 and 1780, I found 
two volumes to which particular interest attaches. One, for- 
merly owned by Judge Sewall and now owned by the New 
York Historical Society, contains an almost complete file of 
"The Boston News-Letter" from the first issue of April 24, 
1704, to April 19, 1708. It was described by Dr. Green at the 
meeting of this Society held in November, 1890. 1 The other, 
now owned by the Boston Athenseum, contains a file of the 
" News-Letter" almost complete from February 19, 1710-11, 
to October 17, 1715. It was given to the Boston Athenseum 
in 1819 by Marshall B. Spring. It contains notes in ink, all 
apparently in the same hand. The only note that throws any 
light on the possible writer is one at the bottom of the second 
page of the issue of October 6, 1712, which reads: 

Samuel Green the Son of Barthol & Jane Green was born Satterday 
Octob' 4 th [the 4 is blotted, evidently written over] about 4. p.m. Wake- 
field Midwife Was baptised Lords-Day Octob r - 5. p. m. f y e Rever d 
Mr. Ebenezer Pemberton in y e South-Meetinghouse. Laus Deo. 

i 2 Proceedings, vi. 171-174. 


It would not be unreasonable to infer that the writer was 
Bartholomew Green, the printer of the "News-Letter" from 
April 24, 1704, to November 7, 1707, and again from October 8, 
1711, to December 28, 1732, on which day he died. Green's own 
signature, however, attached to his will (dated 1732) is ap- 
parently different from that in the note. On the other hand, 
a comparison of the writing with the original of Se wall's Diary 
shows almost conclusively that the note given above was written 
by Sewall. Yet why, it may be asked, should Sewall be so mi- 
nute in entering this particular birth ? An explanation is not 
far to seek. In his Diary (II. 363) for 1712 occur these entries : 

Octobr 4. Satterday, About 4 p.m. Cousin Green is brought to Bed 
of a Son. Sam. Kneeland told me of it, to whom I gave a shilling. 
Octob r 5. Mr. Pemberton baptiseth this little son, whom his Father 
named Samuel. 

It seems probable that the child was named after Sewall, 
and it is certain that the child's mother was a relative of his. 
On June 16, 1710, Bartholomew Green married for his second 
wife Jane Tappan ; and the marriage ceremony was performed 
by Judge Sewall. 1 Jane Tappan was no doubt the daughter 
of Sewall's sister Hannah and her husband Jacob Tappan (or 
Toppan), of Newbury. Hence the bride was a niece of the 
Judge. It is needless to point out that in the seventeenth 
and eighteenth centuries the word " cousin " meant almost any 
relationship, but more especially indicated a nephew or niece. 

But whoever owned the volume, its chief interest lies in the 
documents that are bound in with the newspapers. Dr. Green 
described six such documents in the volume owned by the 
New York Historical Society. The Boston Athenaeum volume 
has no fewer than fourteen, and once had fifteen. In a com- 
munication to this Society made in October, 1864, on " Cata- 
logues of Harvard University," Sibley, speaking of the Triennial 
Catalogues, said: " A few years since, I found an excellent copy 
of the one for 1715, bound near the middle of a volume of the 
4 Boston News Letter ' of that year, which is in the Library of 
the Boston Athenaeum. Being of the same size as the news- 
paper, it had till then escaped observation." 2 This catalogue 
is no longer in the volume. As such documents are sometimes 

1 Boston "Record Commissioners' Reports, xxviii. 45. 

2 1 Proceedings, viii. 31. 


mistaken for supplements, perhaps I may be allowed to repeat 
a remark recently written elsewhere : 

The matter of supplements raises another difficult point. Many files 
of newspapers were formed years or even generations ago, and bound 
in with the newspapers themselves are copies of proclamations, declara- 
tions, poems, elegies, satirical skits, political pieces, and other docu- 
ments of various kinds. Valuable and sometimes unique copies of 
documents have been preserved in this unexpected manner. But such 
documents are not supplements. It may be laid down as a safe rule 
that every genuine supplement of a newspaper has a heading or an 
imprint by which its identity can be established. This heading is some- 
times, but by no means always, followed by a number which generally 
(though not always) corresponds with the number of the main issue of 
the same date. 1 

A description of the documents bound in the Boston Athe- 
naeum volume follows: 

I. After the issue of August 11, 1712, is a broadside con- 
taining a Latin poem in thirty-three lines headed " Martij 27. 
1712." They are addressed to Sewall, are signed " N. Hobart" 
— the Rev. Nehemiah Hobart (H. C. 1667), — and are followed 
by two Latin lines signed "S. S." 

II. After the issue of November 30, 1713, is a broadside, at 
the top of which is an elaborate " engraved head, or mourning 
piece." The description of this given by William R. Deane 
in the 4< New England Historical and Genealogical Register " 
(XXII. 140, 141) for April, 1868, need not be repeated here. 
Then follow the lines : 

An ELEGY in Memory of the Worshipful | Major Thomas Leonard 
Esq. | Of Taunton in New England] Who departed this Life on the 24th. 
Day of November, \ Anno Domini 1713. In the 73d. Year of his Age. 

This elegy, printed in two columns, was written by the Rev. 
Samuel Danforth (H. C. 1683) of Taunton. The poem was 
alluded to in 1794 by the Rev. Peres Fobes as "an eulogy," 2 
and was reprinted by Deane from the original in the volume 
under discussion. There is no imprint. 

1 Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, ix. 404, 405. 

2 1 Collections, iii. 173. 


III. After the issue of December 7, 1713, is a broadside 
having at the top an " engraved head, or mourning piece " 
closely resembling that of No. II. Then come the lines : 

On the DEATH of the very Learned, Pious and Excelling | Gershom 
Bulkley Esq. M.D. | Who had his Mortality swallowed up of Life, 
December the Second 1713. JEtatis Suce 78. | Sanctus erat Quanquam 
Lucas, Medicusque Sepulchri, | Jura subit, factus Victiraa dira necis : 
| A Saint tho' Luke, and a Physician too, \ Struck Sail to Death, as 
other Mortals do. 

The text is printed in two columns, the first containing three 
stanzas. The top of the second column has, unfortunately, 
been cut out. Then comes the word "£UitCt" followed by 
two stanzas, and then these lines : 

Sic mihi contingat vivere sicque Mori 

Scfjamug Jamesms 

Brookfield Decemb. 
7. 1713. 


New-London : Printed by T. Green, 1714. 

Timothy Green, the brother, — not the nephew, as commonly 
stated, — of Bartholomew Green, removed from Boston to New 
London on August 10, 1714 (Sewall's Diary, III. 14). 
Hence this broadside is an earty New London imprint. 

IV. After the issue of February 22, 1713-14, is a broadside 
containing two Resolves of the General Court, — one dated 
October 14, 1713, the other February 10, 1713 [-14], — re- 
lating to " Five Town-ships allowed at present ... in the 
County of York, in the late Province of Mayne." The im- 
print reads: "BOSTON: Printed by B. Green, Printer to 
His Excellency the GOV. & COUNCIL. 1713." 

V. After the issue of September 20, 1714, is a copy of "The 
London Gazette. Published by Authority. From Saturday 
July 31. to Tuesday August 3^ 1714," No. 5247. This is a 
sheet printed on both sides. 

VI. The " News-Letter " of October 4 and 11, 1714, each con- 
tained an advertisement (p. 2/2) stating that "the Subscribers 


in the Partnership for Circulating Bills or Notes, Founded on 
Land-Security, . . . are desired to meet on Tuesday the 19th 
Currant, ... at the Exchange Tavern in Kings-Street Boston." 
After the issue of October 25, 1714, is a very small sheet headed 
"Advertisement," and ending with these words: 

These are to give Notice, That the said | Meeting is Deferr'd unto 
Monday the First j Day of November next Ensuing, at the said | Time 
and Place. | Dated, Boston, October \§th. 1714. 

VII. After the issue of October 25, 1714, is a badly mutilated 
broadside containing " A Proclamation " by Governor Dudley 
"Requiring all Persons being in Office of Authority or Govern- 
ment at th[e Decease] of the late Queen, to proceed in the 
Execution of their respective 0[ffices]." The date of the 
Proclamation was, according to Mr. Worthington C. Ford, 
October 27, 1714. 1 

VIII. After the issue of December, 6, 1714, is a broadside 
printed in two columns signed " J. C." and headed : 

Upon the DEA TH of that Aged, Pious, Sincere-hearted CHRIS- 
TIAN "j JOHN ALDEN esq* | Late MAGISTRATE of New-Pli- 
mouth Colony, who dyed Sept 12th. 1687. | being about eighty nine 
years of age. 

The author was doubtless the Rev. John Cotton (H. C. 1657) 
of Plymouth, a son of the Rev. John Cotton of Boston. 2 

IX. and X. After the issue of February 14, 1714-15, are two 
documents, each a single sheet printed on both sides. One is 
headed : 

My son, fear thou the Lord, | and the King : and meddle not with 
them that are given | to change, Proverbs Chap. 24. Verse 21. 

The other is headed : 

A DIALOGUE | Between a Boston Man and a Country Man. 

It ends with the words : "PRINTED FOR A PUBLICK 
GOOD. 1714." 

1 2 Proceedings, xv. 337. 

2 The lines were printed, though not from the broadside, in "Pilgrim Alden," 
edited by Augustine E. Alden, 1902, pp. 110-114. The broadside is reproduced, 
with facsimile, in " The Mayflower Descendant " (ix. 193-196) for October, 1907. 


Both documents relate to the proposed incorporation of 
Boston in or about 1714, and have been printed by Mr. 
Worthington C. Ford in the " Publications of the Colonial 
Society of Massachusetts," X. 345-352. 

XL After the issue of February 21, 1714-15, is a document 
in four pages headed : 

THE | CASE | Of His Excellency the GOVERNOUR and Coun- 
cil | Of the Province of the Massachusetts- Bay in New-England, truly 

At the bottom of page 4 is written in ink in Judge Sewall's 
hand : " This was Printed by Thomas Fleet at Boston March, 
14 th 1714/15." The document was printed by Mr. Worthing- 
ton C. Ford in the Proceedings (2d series, XV. 356-362) of 
this Society for December, 1901. 

XII. After the issue of March 28, 1715, is a document in 
eight pages headed : 

Samuel Mulford's | SPEECH | to the | ASSEMBLY at NEW-. 
YORK, | April the Second, 1714. 

The attention of Mr. Wilberforce Eames was called to this 
document by Mr. Worthington C. Ford, and on November 12, 
1901, Mr. Eames wrote Mr. Ford as follows: 

I thank you for your note of the 11th inst, enclosing title of Mul- 
ford's Speech, which is one of the New York Bradford imprints that 
Mr. Hildeburn was not able to locate, though he included it in his 
check list under the year 1714. 

XIII. and XIV. After the issue April 11, 1715, are two 

broadsides. One is headed : 

COPY | Of the Fifth & Sixth ARTICLES of the Treaty of Neu- 
trality | in America, between England audi France, in the Year 1686. 
| late sent in Orders to His Majesty's Frigots attending the | Gov- 
ernment of this Province, to be put in Execution to | Effect. 

The imprint reads: ''BOSTON: Printed by B. Green, 
Printer to his Excellency the GOV. & COUNCIL. 1715." 

The other is headed with the Royal Arras and is a Procla- 
mation by Governor Dudley dated March 29, 1715, " Against 
a Commerce & Trade with the French of Canada, Cape Breton^ 
&c," and has the same imprint as No. XIII. 



M. A. De Wolfe Howe presented the following paper: 
More Letters of William Vassall. 

In the second volume of the Bowdoin and Temple Papers 
(Collections, 7th series, Vol. VI.) there are two letters (pp. 66, 
105) to James Bowdoin from William Vassall, who had fled to 
England, interceding with the Governor to save his property 
from the effects of confiscation following the Revolutionary 
War. Three earlier letters from Vassall to Simeon Potter, the 
leading shipmaster of his time (1720-1806) in Bristol, Rhode 
Island, especially distinguished for commanding the Bristol 
boat which took part in the destruction of the Gaspee, have 
recently come to light. It is evident that Vassall was as greatly 
concerned for his Rhode Island as for his Massachusetts real 
estate. The letters are now in the possession of Mr. Nathaniel 
Greene Herreshoff, of Bristol, whose wife was descended from 
the sister of Simeon Potter, who married Mark Anthony 
D'Wolf, the first of his name in Rhode Island. By Mr. 
Herreshoff s permission the letters have been copied for the 
present purpose. 

In substance and expression these letters have much in 
common with those which Vassall subsequently wrote to Gov- 
ernor Bowdoin. Their reference to his property in Massachu- 
setts, and the fact that when the second letter was written 
Vassall knew that Potter had moved from Bristol to Swansey 
and was a member of the Massachusetts legislature, give suf- 
ficient reason for reporting them to this Society. It is worth 
noting that a copy of rhymes in Potter's handwriting preserved 
by a descendant of one of his sisters contains the couplet : 

The man thats called a Tory, 
To plague is all my glory, 1 

a sentiment which excites wonder at Vassall's choice of a cor- 
respondent. In the third letter it will be seen that Vassall, 
besides stating his case to Potter and many others, appealed 
to Moses Brown of Providence, who in return promised " his 
friendly assistance." It was Moses Brown's brother John 
who in 1781 had bought the Vassall farm in Bristol, 2 so that 

i See " The History of Bristol, R. I.," by W. H. Munro, p. 175. 
2 Ibid. p. 244. 


the " friendly assistance " must have had its limitations. From 
John Brown the Vassall farm descended to the Herreshoff 
family, who still possess it. 

William Vassall to Simeon Potter. 

Clapham, near London, April 10, 1784 

Dear Sir. — I wrote you March 23 a State of my Case, and requested 
you would assist me in my endeavours to obtain the restitution of my 
Bristol farm which had been confiscated & sold. If said letter should 
miscarry, the following Account will inform you of Facts, and will 
demonstrate the cruel & unmerited treatment I have met with 

I was born in Jamaica, which at the time of my birth was ever since 
has been, & now is subject to, & under the power & authority of the 
King of Great britain ; therefore the King of Great britain is my liege 
Lord & I am his liege subject ; and my natural Allegiance was due to 
him at my birth, & from my birth to this day, so that I was born, 
always have been, and now am a Real British Subject. I was removed 
at about 2 years of age from Jamaica to Philadelphia, and at about 4 
years of age I was removed to Boston in Massachusetts State, where 
I was educated & where & in Rhode Island State I have lived between 
50 & 60 years from choice, because I esteemed the Government & 
Inhabitants of S d States : for I was not Engaged in business, and never 
got on \_sic\ farthing in Either of s d States, but I expended in s d States, 
during my residence in them, near Fifty thousand pounds Sterling, 
Every farthing of which I received from my Estate in Jamaica : This 
clearely manifests my friendly disposition to said States. I never did 
anything unfriendly to Either of s d States, or to any one of the United 
States. I never gave, subscribed or promised a single farthing for 
raising Soldiers, or for or towards any hostile attempt, against the 
United States. I was neither an Addresser, Protester, or Associater. 
I was appointed a mandamus Counsellor, without my knowledge, & as 
soon as I knew it, I refused to accept, & was the First that refused. 
As soon as hostilities began between Great britain & the United States, 
I withdrew with my family from Boston, then in the possession of the 
King's Troops, to Nantucket. I staid some months at Nantucket, but 
finding all Intercourse between Jamaica & the United States was 
intirely cut off by the unhappy War, I removed, not from choice but 
from necessity, to Great britain, that I might have a communication 
with my Jamaica Estate, on which I depended intirely for to maintain 
my family. If I had removed from Nantucket to Jamaica, my Native 
place, and lived on my plantation, the sole property I had for the 
maintenance of my family, I should have removed to a place, as much 


under the power of the King of Great britain as any part of the british 
dominion then was, or now is. The greatest part of my property lay 
in Jamaica, joind with Great britain, in open War against the united 
States, and I had a considerable property in Massachusetts & Rhode 
Island States, Confederated with the other American States in open 
War against Great britain. Being thus situated, I would ask every 
considerate impartial person, What I, an inlirm man upwards of 60 
years of age with a large family, could do? I owed natural Allegiance 
to the King of Great Britain, my liege Lord, and the greatest part of 
my property lay in Jamaica, absolutely under his power, & subject to 
his Authority, and I had a considerable property in Massachusetts & 
Rhode Island States, where I had lived between 50 & 60 years from 
choice, because those states were agreeable to me, & I had the highest 
regard & esteem for the Inhabitants, with whom I had lived happily so 
many years. Under these Circumstances, I greatly lamented the 
unhappy disastrous War between two powers, to which I bore the 
greatest good will, and for which I had the highest regard; and pru- 
dence, common Sense, Principle & Affection dictated to me, that the 
only rational and moral part I could act, was to remain Neuter, and to 
do nothing inimical or unfriendly to either power, which I have relig- 
iously Endeavoured to observe. If I have ever deviated from a Neu- 
trality, it has been in favour of the United States, by Refusing to 
accept the mandamus Counsellorship, Withdrawing from the King's 
Troops, & putting myself under the protection of the United States. 

Yesterday I saw, in the Public Advertiser, a Proclamation issued by 
Congress, dated Janu y 14, 1784, Ratifying & confirming the Definitive 
Treaty in every part & Clause, Requiring & Enjoining all Bodies of 
Magistracy, Legislative, Executive and Judiciary to conform to it, and 
to carry it into Execution in Every clause & sentiment: and by an 
unanimous resolve They earnestly recommand to the several Legisla- 
tures, to provide for the restitution of all the Estates Rights & Proper- 
ties, which have been confiscated, belonging to Real british Subjects. 
I presume the several Legislatures will, from a sense of Justice & for 
their own honour, Fulfil and Carry into Execution the definitive 
Treaty, and will, agreeably to the 5. article restore my Estate, to me, 
for I am a Real british Subject as I was born in Jamaica, as is before 
related. If they do not, I shall be in a much worse situation, than I 
should be, if I had Accepted the mandamus Counsellorship, & had 
taken an Active part against the United States ; for If I had, I should 
receive a compensation from the British Government, whereas now I 
shall not receive any. 

I was neither a freeman, nor an Inhabitant of Rhode Island State, 
but having a pleasant Farm at Bristol in s d State, I occasionally went 
to it, and staid a longer, or shorter time, as suited my Convenience : 


But Boston, in Massachusetts State was the place of my settled abode ; 
where I was taxed for my Poll, and personal Estate & Faculty : And 
before I left America I Let my s d Farm at Bristol, to Mess. J. Waldron 
& J. Cushing on shares, That all the business I had in Rhode Island 
state, was to receive my share of the Income of s d Farm, as P Agree- 
ment, in lieu of Rent : Therefore I owed no personal Services to Rhode 
Island State, but s d Mess. Waldron & Cushing were accountable to 
s d State, as they improved the Farm, for all Taxes & for all personal 
services for or on ace 1 of my s d Farm. 

Rhode Island State, in confiscating and selling Bristol Farm, has 
Condemned and Treated me as a Criminal, tho' I have not Committed 
the least Crime against, nor have violated in any respect Any one of 
the Laws of said State, as clearly appears by the foregoing State of my 
Case. Rhode Island State, in Confiscating & Selliug my s d farm, has 
not punished me, because it is impossible there should be any punish- 
ment, where there is no Crime : for punishment is nothing else but 
the Effect or Consequence of the violation of a penal Law : But said 
State has wrongfully taken my property from me by the Iron hand of 
power, I find by woful Experience and to my great Loss, that there 
may be power where there is no right, and that power may be arbi- 
trarily exerted, without the least shadow of reason or justice, to take 
from an innocent person his Estate and property, and to deprive him 
of His personal Rights. I sincerely wish, Dear Sir, you may never 
meet with the same cruel & unmerited treatment as I have met with, 
in having my person proscribed and my property sequestered 03* Massa- 
chusetts State & in having my property seized, confiscated & sold by 
Rhode Island State, without my having committed the least Offence 
against, or having violated in any one instance any of the Laws of 
Either of said States. It is extremely grating to a man of a liberal 
miud, conscious to himself of his own innocence & integrity, to be 
obliged to Solicit & petition for. as if it was for a favour, the Restitu- 
tion of his own rightful property, which has been forcibly wrasted from 
him by a mere Act of arbitrary power. Place yourself in my sit- 
uation, and Certainly you will feel the Truth and force of this 

I say as St. Paul said on his Trial before Festus, Acts 25, Ch. 8, 10 
& 11 Verses, mutatis mutandis, where our Cases differ, Neither against 
the Laws nor the Government of Rhode Island, or any of the United 
States have I offended anything at all. To Rhode Island State or Any 
of the United States have I done no Wrong : For if I be an offender 
or have committed anything worthy of Proscription & Confiscation of 
my property, / refuse not Proscription & Confiscation of my property 
but if I have done nothing worthy of Proscription & Confiscation of my 
property, It is impossible that any Assembly of Men or Government on 


Earth should have a Right (by sorrowful experience 1 know they may 
have a power tho' they have no Right) to proscribe my person and to 
Confiscate my property by arbitrary ex post facto Laws. Truth & 
Justice are Eternal and immutable ; They cannot be changed or altered 
in the least by the Sophistry, Assertions or Laws of fallible Men. 

A Gentleman of your Understanding, Sense of justice and liberal 
way of thinking, must See the absurdity & cruel Injustice of all ex post 
facto Laws, made to punish, or more properly to injure, for Actions 
done before the existence of such Laws, and which have not been 
declared Crimes by any preceding Laws, and must detest them as 
unjust, oppressive and inconsistent with the fundamental Principles of 
a free State ; as it is justly expressed in the declaration of Rights by 
Massachusetts, Delaware, Maryland & North Carolina States, Cited on 
the Other Side. I am fully persuaded, that you will cheerfully assist 
an Injured and Innocent person in his Endeavour to obtain Relief and 
on this persuasion, I take the liberty to solicit your friendly Aid. I 
have wrote to D r William Bradford & William Ellery, Esq r and re- 
quested their friendly assistance. If you will converse with them, 
probably you and they may think of some measures, which may pro- 
cure me relief and may Enable me to Obtain the restitution of my 
Confiscated property. I shall esteem it a favour, if you will write me 
your opinion as to the measures I had best pursue, and whether you 
think it is probable that I shall by any means recover my property or 
not. Your friendly advice & assistance in this affair will be of Essen- 
tial service to me. Mrs. Vassal! & family unite in best regards to you 
and Mrs. Potter, and I remain with great esteem 

Dear sir your most Obed hum Serv 

William Vassall. 

Massachusetts declaration of Rights, Article 24. 
Laws, made to punish for action done before the existence of such 
Laws, and which have not been declared Crimes by any preceding 
Laws, are unjust, oppressive, and inconsistent with the fundamental 
principles of a Free State. 

Delaware declaration of Rights, Article 11. 
Retrospective laws for punishing Offences committed before the 
existence of such Laws, are oppressive, Unjust, and ought not to 
be made. 

Maryland declaration of Rights, Article 15. 
Retrospective laws, punishing Facts committed before the Existence 
of such Laws, and by them only declared Criminal, are oppressive, 
Unjust and incompatible with liberty, Wherefore no ex post facto law 
ought to be made. 



North Carolina declaration of Rights, Article 24. 

Retrospective Laws, punishing facts committed before the Existence 
of Such Laws, and by them only declared Criminal, are oppressive, 
Unjust, and incompatible with liberty, Wherefore no ex post facto 
Law ought to be made. 

I cannot forbear remarking, That it clearly appears by these Cita- 
tions, That my observations in the foregoing are plain obvious Truths, 
which forcibly Strike, and irresistibly Convince the human mind. 
What a pity it is, That the Laws and declarations of Rights in those 
States are diametrically opposite? How greatly it would have been to 
the honour of the American United States, If, in their arduous and 
noble Struggle for liberty, Their laws had been made conformable to 
the plain humane Dictates of Liberty, Truth & Justice, as they are 
Clearly and Nobly expressed and declared in the aforesaid declarations 
of Rights? I trust & sincerely hope, as Peace is now Established, 
Passion will Subside, the Voice of Truth and Calm reason will direct, 
so that all the Irregularities and Wrongs which have been committed, 
during a time of War and Tumult, will be rectified and redressed, & 
Justice will be impartially administered to Every One, who has been 
Injured or Oppressed. 

Colo. Simeon Potter. 

To Simeon Potter. 

Clapha.m near London Aug* 30, 1784 
Dear Sir, — I wrote to you March 23 and April 15, but have not 
been favoured with a line from you in answer. Since I wrote my last, 
I have received a letter from my worthy friend William Ellery Esq r 
wherein he informs me that you have removed from Bristol to Swansey 
and by a late Boston Newspaper I find you are member for Swansey. 
In my s d letters I stated my case to you, and I flatter myself, that you 
think that I have met with Cruel unmerited treatment. As I think I 
am greatly aggrieved, I have desired John Lowell Esq r , who is my 
Counsel, to Exhibit a Petition in my name to the General Court of 
Massachusetts praying that I may be admitted to the rights of a Citi- 
zen, and to Exhibit a memorial, stating therein Facts, and praying that 
my house in Boston, which has been mortgaged to Mr. P. N. Smith by 
a Committee of the General Court for security for money he lent the 
State, may be restored to me free from Mr. Smith[VJ mortgage. 

I am Certain, That Reason Law & Justice dictate, That no man 
should be punished or suffer the least damage in his person or property, 
Who has not Committed Any Crime. And I am Certain, That I have 
not Committed any Crime against, nor have violated in any respect 


Any One Either of Massachusetts Rhode Island, or Any One of the 
United States, nor have Ever done Any one thing in the least degree 
Unfriendly to Any One of the United States. Nevertheless Rhode 
Island State has confiscated & Sold my Farm at Bristol, which cost me 
£3500 Sterling, And Massachusetts State has proscribed my Person, 
Sequestered my property, and mortgaged my house in Boston for 
Security for money borrowed of Mr. P. N. Smith by the State, 
Which are severe punishments or to speak more properly, are shame- 
ful Acts of Injustice, whereby I have been greatly injured. I now 
bona fide declare, That on proof that I have committed any Crime 
against, or have violated in any respect Any One Law, either of 
Massachusetts Rhode Island, or Any One of the United States, or that I 
have Ever done any One thing in the lowest degree Unfriendly to Any 
One of the United States, I will relinquish all claims for relief from 
Rhode Island & Massachusetts States, and will acknowledge that I 
have no reason to Complain. But if said States cannot prove either 
of these things against me, I Rest my Claim intirely on the Justice of 
my cause, that is, that no such proof can be produced, and should 
[they] refuse to grant me the relief I pray for in my petitions, they, 
will Rob me of my property in a mean dastardly manner, by Exerting 
the sovereign power of the State wrongfully against an Innocent Indi- 
vidual. I have too high an opinion of the honour and Justice of 
s d States to suppose, that they will refuse to give me that relief, which 
Justice demands that they should give. I have in my afores d letters 
given you a full State of my Case, and beg the favour of you, when my 
petition Comes before Massachusetts Assembly, to support my rightful 
Cause And to use your Interest to procure me the relief I pray for, 
that is, that I may be admitted to the Rights of a Citizen, and that my 
house in Boston may be restored to me free from the Encumbrance 
of Mr. Smith's mortgage. If you will be so kind as to converse with 
John Lowell Esq 1- who is my Counsel and One of the Senate, and 
Nath 1 Gorham Esq r Member of the House and my particular friend, 
you may be able to adopt such a plan as may be successful. You must 
be sensible, Dear Sir, that when a private person has been oppressed 
and injured by an Act of a Democratic Legislature, and applies to that 
same Legislature for Redress, he stands but little chance of succeeding 
in his application, however just and righteous his Cause is, Unless 
Gentlemen of distinguished Character Weight and influence Espouse 
and Support his rightful claim. This, I flatter myself, will appear a 
reasonable apology for my freedom in soliciting your friendly Aid. 
I have desired D r William Bradford & Henry Marchant Esq r , who 
were Counsel for me in the Action brought against my bristol farm, 
to Exhibit to the Gen 1 Assembly of Rhode Island, a petition in my 
name praying for Restitution of my bristol farm. As you are 


acquainted with all the principal Gentlemen of Rhode Island State, 
and know the merits of my claim, you may do me Essential service, by 
representing my case to the leading members of both Houses, and 
Engaging them to support my petition when it comes before the 
Gen 1 Assembly, & for which I shall be greatly obliged to you. Mrs. 
Vassall & family unite in best regards to you & Mrs. Potter, and I 
remain with Tenders of my best Services and assure I should be happy 
to have an opportunity to render you any friendly offices, 
Dear Sir Y r Affect hum Serv* 

William Vassall 
Col Simeon Potter. 


Col Simeon Potter 

Massachusetts State 

To Simeon Potter. 

Clapham near London March 14, 1785 
Dear Sir, — Lately T have received your Esteemed favours of July 10 
and Novem 6. In which you express your abhorrence of the wicked pro- 
ceedings against me — assure me that I stand foremost for the restitu- 
tion of my property — advise me to come over immediately with my 
family, and that if I should come, you believe, the Gen 1 Court would 
restore my Estate to me. This would be very pleasing, were it not, 
that some sullen ill natured facts stare me full in the face & tell me 
that your friendship for me makes you look only on the favourable 
side. Some of the facts I will mention. In January 1784 Mr. Tudor 
my Counsel Exhibited a petition in my name to the Gen 1 Court, Pray- 
ing, that I might be relieved from the Proscription & Confiscation Acts 
&c. No one Person in the Court spoke in fav r of my petition, and 
Mr. Tudor was permitted to withdraw it. In April 1784, Dr. Lloyd 
Applied, in Consequence of the Act of March 29, 1784, to Governor 
Hancock & Council, for a licence for me to return, which was refused. 
In Novem r 1784 after a violent debate in the House of Representa- 
tives, Whether the Absentees who had returned since the Ratification 
of a definitive Treaty, should be permitted to remain, or not, till the 
third Wednesday of the next Session of the General Court, it was 
determined by One Single Vote that they might remain till then. And 
to mention but one fact more, Viz The infamous Wicked Act of 
Novem r 10, 1784, which Enacts, That all the Estates of Absentees, 
which had been mortgaged by order of Government, should be con- 
sidered as having been Confiscated to the amount of the sum for which 
they were mortgaged, and if any Absentee should Sue for his Estate, 



the mortgagee should plead the General Issue, and give the Act in 
Evidence. Now it is a notorious fact, that my Estate Real and per- 
sonal has not been Confiscated in toto, or in parte. Nevertheless, 
though the Jury and Court knew that no part of my Real or personal 
Estate had been confiscated, upon a Writ of Ejectment for possession 
of my house in Boston, The General Issue being pleaded And the Act 
being given in Evidence, The Jury on their Oaths must find, and the 
Court on their Oaths must adjudge that my house has been confiscated 
to the amount of the mortgage, that is, The Jury on their Oaths must 
find and the Court on their Oaths must adjudge a thing or action to 
have been done, which they knew never had been done. This strange 
wicked Law Enacts, that falsehoods shall be Truth to my great Injury 
and heavy loss. When you consider the foregoing, and the great 
trouble and vast expense that attends the Removing of a large family 
across the Atlantic, you cannot but see the propriety of my not return- 
ing to Boston as things are situated. Notwithstanding the Barbarous, 
Injurious & Unjust Treatment I have met with from the Legislatures, 
I have [such] a great fondness for & Attachment to America, That if, 
by the advices I shall receive from my friends, It shall appear to me 
that I shall be cordially received and that I may live in the same 
agreeable manner there that I did formerly, I shall return to my 
pleasant house in Boston. 

I have inquired for Mrs. Grant & am informed that She is in the 
Country, where I cannot learn, and I am told That she will shortly 
return to London : As soon as I can find where She is, I will wait on 
her and talk with her about the Laud you mention, and will write you 
what she says. 

I have wrote a full State of my Case in Massachusetts to D r James 
Lloyd, Nath 1 Gorham Esq r & W m Tudor Esq r , and a full State of my 
Case in Rhode Island to Moses Brown Esq 1- of Providence, & Henry 
Marchant Esq r . I have rec d a very kind letter from Mr. Brown prom- 
ising me his friendly assistance. I have desired Mr. Marchant to draw 
a Memorial in my [name] and therein to State the facts I have men- 
tioned in my letter, proving that the Judgment of the Superior Court 
on the Special Verdict of the Jury, at the Trial at Bristol on the last 
Monday of Jan 7 1785, Respecting me, is Absurd, Erroneous, & Con- 
trary to Law, and pray therefore that s d Judgment may [be] nullified 
and set aside, and that my farm may be restored to me. If you will 
talk with D r Lloyd, M r Gorham & M r Tudor about my affairs in 
Massachusetts ; and with Moses Brown & Henry Marchant Esq" about 
my Affairs in Rhode Island, and Give them your advice & assistance 
you will do me essential Service, and I shall be greatly obliged to you. 
Mrs. Vassall and family unite in affectionate regards to you and [Mrs.] 
Potter, flattering ourselves, that We shall have the pleasure to Renew 


our friendly and much Esteemed Acquaintance And I remain with 
the greatest Esteem and Respect 

Dear Sir Your affect hum e Serv* 

William Vassall 


Col° Simeon Potter 
At Swansey 

Massachusetts State 
If he is not at Swansey forward it to him 
at Bristol 
Rhode Island §tate 

F. B. Sanborn communicated the following paper : 
The Early History of Kansas, 1854-1861. 

During the present year important additions have been 
made to the manuscripts relating to the struggle in Kansas, in 
the six years from 1854 to 1861, between the barbarism en- 
gendered by negro slavery and the civilizing forces of free 
labor, free schools, and free speech. There have also been 
published and sent to this Society several papers by citizens 
of Kansas, bearing on the earlier years of this struggle, and 
correcting some of the errors in history naturally arising, either 
from the passions or the intrigues of the period in question, or 
from the forgetfulness or prejudice of later years, when most 
of the actors in the struggle have passed away. As I was in 
some sort an actor in the matter for most of the years which 
these manuscripts and printed papers cover, it seems proper 
that my statement should be put on record, since it contra- 
venes much that has been spoken and written, in this Society 
and elsewhere, concerning this momentous period in the civil 
and military history of the United States. The struggle in 
Kansas was the prelude, even the rehearsal on a small scale, of 
the Civil War of 1861-1865 ; and the questions involved were 
almost exactly the same, with the exception of those matters 
of foreign policy which sought to play so large a part in that war. 

A disposition is manifest of late, among writers who favor 
soft names for harsh things, to call our Civil War neither by 
that name nor by its official title, the " War of the Rebellion," 
but " The War between the States." It was never, in fact, 
a war between States, but between institutions, — the so- 
called " peculiar domestic institution " of negro slavery, and the 
actual institution of Democracy, resting on free labor, free soil, 
and free speech. There was never a time during the four 


years of warfare when there were not friends of freedom in 
each of the revolted States, and friends of slavery in each of 
the loyal States. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers, white 
and colored, fought for the Union and against negro slavery, 
whose home was, or had been till they were driven out, in the 
seceding States. These soldiers came from Virginia, both the 
Carolinas, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee 
(to the number of 30,000 or more), Louisiana, Arkansas, and 
even from Texas. Missouri, Kentucky, and Maryland, States 
on which the supporters of slavery confidently counted, fur- 
nished soldiers to both sides, but, on the whole, more to the 
support of freedom than to the maintenance of slavery. On 
the other hand, hardly a Northern State that did not send re- 
cruits to the Southern armies ; while in Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, 
and even in New York and New Hampshire, were thousands 
of pro-slavery Democrats, whose wishes, if not their personal 
service and money, went to support the losing cause. 

The repeal of the Missouri Compromise was the cause 
of the struggle in Kansas, and that, in turn, was the occasion 
of disunion and the Civil War. It was expressly declared 
that the exclusion of slavery from Kansas would be just cause 
for the South to secede, and this declaration was echoed from 
Alabama and South Carolina. A vigorous pamphlet lately 
published by the Secretary of the Kansas Historical Society, 
George W. Martin, gives the facts and citations on this point. 
The local leaders in the movement to force slavery upon 
Kansas were D. R. Atchison, president of the Senate at 
Washington, and B. F. Stringfellow, both of whom long sur- 
vived the Civil War, — one dying in 1886 and the other in 
1891. Of the former the St. Louis " Democrat," a paper in 
the interest of Benton and F. P. Blair, said in 1854: 

The fraud by which the Missouri Compromise was repealed re- 
quired to be consummated by another fraud, and a man (Atchison) 
who made a tool of Douglas for the perpetration of the first fraud, 
telling him that if he did n't introduce a bill for that purpose that he 
would resign his position as president of the senate and introduce it 
himself, has at last found it necessary to resign ... in order to super- 
intend the perpetration of the second fraud [Martin, p. 9]. 

Atchison in November, 1854, had made a speech at some 
point in Platte County, on the Kansas border, to his Missouri 
constituents. He said : 


The people of Kansas, in their first elections, would decide whether 
or not the slaveholder was to be excluded. . . . What is your duty ? 
When you reside in one day's journey of the Territory, and when 
your peace, your quiet, and your property depend upon your action, 
you can, without any exertion, send five hundred of your young men 
who will vote in favor of your institutions [meaning negro slavery]. 
Should each county in the State of Missouri only do its duty, the 
question will be decided quietly and peaceably at the ballot-box. * 

This advice was taken, both then and at the spring election 
for a territorial legislature, when a thousand Missourians went 
to vote in Lawrence. By this means a wholly pro-slavery 
legislature was chosen, which enacted a slave code for Kansas, 
under which none but pro-slavery men could hold office ; and 
if any person spoke, wrote, or printed his opinion that men had 
no right to hold slaves in Kansas, he was guilty of felony, and 
could be imprisoned for two years. This legislature quarrelled 
with its first Pennsylvania Democratic territorial Governor, 
and he was forced to flee from Kansas in disguise, in May, 
1856. But long before that the killing and expulsion of free- 
state men had begun, recommended by Atchison and String- 
fellow. The newspaper of the latter, called the " Squatter 
Sovereign," and published at the Kansas town named for 
Atchison, said (August 28, 1855) : 

We can tell the impertinent scoundrels of the (New York) Tribune 
that they may exhaust an ocean of ink, their Emigrant Aid Societies 
spend their millions and billions, their representatives in Congress 
spout their heretical theories till doomsday, and his excellency 
Franklin Pierce may appoint abolitionist after free-soiler as governor ; 
yet we will continue to tar and feather, drown, lynch and hang every 
white-livered abolitionist who dares to pollute our soil [Martin, p. 15]. 

This threat was carried out as far as power and oppor- 
tunity permitted. Samuel Collins was killed on October 25, 
1855, Charles W. Dow on November 21, and Thomas W. 
Barber on December 6 following. R. P. Brown was murdered 
on January 17, 1856. In April following a Vermonter named 
Baker was taken from his cabin, whipped, hanged to a tree, 
cut down while living, and released on his promise to leave 
Kansas. In May a Massachusetts man named Mace was 
waylaid, and shot and left for dead. Two weeks after, on 

1 See D. W. Wilder's " Annals of Kansas," p. 40. 


May 21, 1856, the Lawrence hotel and the offices of two free- 
state newspapers were destroyed, the Lawrence shops pil- 
laged, and the house of Dr. Charles Robinson, afterwards 
Governor of Kansas, burned. The next day Preston S. 
Brooks assaulted, and nearly killed, Charles Sumner in the 
Senate chamber at Washington. Not one of these crimes was 
punished, nor did the federal government make any effort to 
punish them. But John Brown had been in Kansas for six or 
seven months, and four or five of his sons for a year or two. 
Forming a small party, consisting of four of his sons, a son-in- 
law, and two free-state settlers named Townsley and Weiner, 
he visited the Pottawatomie region, in the present town of 
Lane, where a gang of ruffians had been insulting and 
threatening peaceful settlers ; there held a sort of drumhead 
court-martial on five of the offenders, and executed them on 
the spot. 

From that time forward the murders of free-state men did 
not cease ; but they were less common, and a state of active 
warfare took their place. Brown at the head of a few men 
attacked and routed a larger force of Missourians and others 
under the command of a Virginian named Pate, capturing and 
disarming twenty-three of them, including their captain and 
lieutenant. This was in June, 1856 ; in August, with his 
small force he resisted the attack made by several hundred 
Missourians upon the small town of Osawatomie ; near which 
the cabins of his sons had been plundered and burnt ; and two 
of them were then in prison as " traitors," but never were 
brought to trial. A third son was murdered by a Missouri 
preacher, Martin White, as the invaders came in over the 
high prairie early in the morning of the Osawatomie fight. 
The fiftieth anniversary of this skirmish was celebrated in 
1906 in the presence of thousands, — the Vice-President of 
the United States giving one of the addresses. But at an 
earlier celebration in 1877, when a monument was dedicated 
to the memory of Brown and his men who fought there, 
Governor Robinson had made the chief address, and had said : 

This is an occasion of no ordinary merit, being for no less an object 
than to honor and keep fresh the memory of those who freely offered 
their lives for their fellow-men. The men whose death we commemo- 
rate this day cheerfully offered themselves a sacrifice for strangers and 
a despised race. They would fight injustice wherever found; if framed 


into law, then they would fight the law; if upheld and enforced by 
government, then government must be resisted. The soul of John 
Brown was the inspiration of the union armies in the emancipation 
war ; and it will be the inspiration of all men in the present and the 
distant future, who may revolt against tyranny and oppression. 

Robinson, however, had not waited one and twenty years to 
express his satisfaction with Brown's course in Kansas. In 
September, 1856, a fortnight after the Osawatomie fight, 
Robinson, writing from Lawrence, gave Brown a letter, which 
Brown brought to me when he made my acquaintance here in 
Boston, more than half a century ago, and which ran thus : 

Captain John Brown. 

My dear Sir, — I take this opportunity to express to you my 
sincere gratification that the late report that you were amoDg the killed 
at the battle of Osawatomie is incorrect. Your course, so far as I have 
been informed, has been such as to merit the heartiest praise from every 
patriot; and I cheerfully accord to you my heartfelt thanks for your 
prompt, efficient, and timely action against the invaders of our rights 
and the murderers of our citizens. History will give your name a 
proud place on her pages ; and posterity will pay homage to your 
heroism in the cause of God and humanity. Trusting that you will 
conclude to remain in Kansas, and serve during the war the cause you 
have done so much to sustain ; and with earnest prayers for your 
health, and protection, from the shafts of death that so thickly beset 
your path, I subscribe myself 

Very respectfully your obedient servant, 

C. Robinson. 

To this letter, when Brown showed it to me, January 2, 
1857, were appended the endorsements of Salmon P. Chase, 
then Governor of Ohio, and of Gerrit Smith, who had given 
810,000 for the freedom of Kansas. 

Now who was Governor Robinson? Born in Worcester 
County, Massachusetts, and educated as a physician, he had 
gone to California early to seek his fortune. He became an 
agent of the New England Emigrant Aid Company, organized 
in 1854 at the instance of Eli Thayer, Dr. Howe, Dr. Hale, then 
a young clergyman at Worcester, and other anti-slavery men, 
but which soon fell into the hands of men like Amos A. Law- 
rence, J. M. S. Williams, and Judge R. A. Chapman of the 
Massachusetts Supreme Court, who were not regarded by 
themselves or the public as fanatical anti-slavery men. One 


of the earliest important papers in the collection lately given 
to this Society by the heirs of Patrick T. Jackson is an early 
document of the Emigrant Aid Company, which explains the 
manner of its management of capital. Dr. Robinson was one of 
several agents who took charge of its business in the Territory 
of Kansas by which agency he laid the foundation of his con- 
siderable fortune. He also became apolitical leader, in which 
function his agency materially assisted him, and received from 
the free-state people of Kansas almost every official title they 
could confer. As Major-General of the free-state militia in 
December, 1855, he commissioned John Brown as Captain, and 
I have, and will submit hereafter, a photographic copy of this 

How these militia were supplied with the new Sharp's 
rifle by citizens of Boston has lately been set forth in an in- 
teresting paper by Mr. W. H. Tsely of Wichita, Kansas, show- 
ing the names of the principal subscribers and the amount 
given by each. In a letter from my college classmate, the late 
Theodore Lyman, to Mr. Jackson, found among our Jackson 
Papers, Lyman, then (June 7, 1856) a scientific student, said, 
"I have alread}^ subscribed for saw-mills and rifles," and then 
enclosed $50 for Dr. Howe's Faneuil Hall Committee. I met 
Dr. Robinson, then known as " Governor " under the abortive 
Topeka Constitution, at a meeting which the State Kansas 
Committee, successors to the Faneuil Hall Committee, had 
organized for Robinson in October, 1856, and as a member of 
that Committee, assisted in collecting the $325 given at that 
meeting to the State Committee. At a later date, and in the 
same capacity, I attended a meeting at which Robinson's chief 
rival in Kansas, General James H. Lane, spoke in his fervid 
prairie manner ; and for many years after I watched the career 
of the two men. 

Twenty-five years after the death of John Brown, one of his 
friends in the critical period of Kansas history, the late Amos 
A. Lawrence, a member of this Society, presented it with 
early portraits of Brown and Robinson, and in so doing made 
certain statements which are not, in my judgment, in strict 
conformity with the ascertained historical facts. Speaking 
of Charles Robinson, at the May meeting of 1884, Mr. Law- 
rence said : 1 

i 2 Proceedings i. 181-183. 


Yet he never bore arms. . . . He sternly held the people to their loyalty 
to the Government [the administration of President Pierce] against 
the arguments and the example of the " higher law " men, who were 
always armed, who were not real settlers, and who were bent on bring- 
ing about a Border war. 

The fact is, Robinson not only " bore arms " in the " Border 
war," already existing by act of Atchison and his Missouri 
followers, but he commanded as major-general the free-state 
militia at Lawrence in the little " Wakarusa war " of Decem- 
ber, 1855 ; and as such he commissioned John Brown to com- 
mand a company there, consisting in part of Brown's six sons 
and a son-in-law, who had been real settlers, several of them 
for a year preceding. Brown, with his usual prudence, had 
carried along his own arms in October, 1855 ; but there is a 
story of the Sharp's rifles which Robinson had received and 
distributed, which a citizen of Kansas in the present year tells. 
Mr. Isely, having had access to the Lawrence and Cabot 
papers, printed this important information in " The American 
Historical Review " (XII. 546-566) for April, 1907. Till then, 
although the general facts were known, the details were al- 
lowed to remain concealed. There is no reason to doubt 
the accuracy of these recent revelations. April 2, 1855, six 
months before John Brown had reached Kansas, Charles Rob- 
inson, an agent of the Emigrant Aid Company, wrote to Eli 
Thayer, an officer of that company, as follows : 

Our people have now formed themselves into four military compa- 
nies, and will meet to drill till they have perfected themselves in the 
art. Also companies are being formed in other places [than Lawrence, 
he means], and we want arms. Give us the weapons and every mau 
from the North will be a soldier and die in his tracks if necessary, to 
protect and defend our rights. . . . Cannot your secret society send us 
200 Sharps rifles as a loan till this question is settled? Also a couple 
of field-pieces ? . . . I have given our people encouragement to expect 
something of the kind, and hope we shall not be disappointed. 

A week later Robinson sent an almost identical letter to 
Dr. Hale, then of Worcester, and now a member of this So- 
ciety ; but not content with this, he sent on from Kansas his 
clerk, George W. Deitzler, who was in the pay of the Emi- 
grant Aid Company, as Robinson was, to hasten the for war d- 



ing of the arms. Mr. Deitzler, in 1879, in a published speech 
said : 

Within an hour after our arrival in Boston, the executive committee 
of the Emigrant Aid Company [of which Mr. Lawrence and Mr. 
Thayer were both members] held a meeting and delivered to me an 
order for one hundred Sharps rifles and I started at once for Hartford, 
arriving there on Saturday evening. The guns were packed on the 
following Sunday and I started for home on Monday morning. The 
boxes were marked " Books." . . . Those rifles did good service in 
the "border war." ... It was perhaps the first shipment of arms for 
our side. 

General Deitzler (such was his rank in the Civil War) may 
have mistaken a date or two ; for my old friend Dr. Webb, 
dating on May 8th from the office of the Emigrant Aid Com- 
pany, No. 3 Winter Street, Boston, said, writing to Robinson 
in Lawrence : 

Mr. Deitzler presented himself at this office on Wednesday last 
[May 2], with a letter from Mr. Thayer relative to a certain business 
intrusted to him ; no one in this village having received any advices. 

We were busily occupied in getting ready for special meeting No. 2, 
... to see if we could raise funds for more Mills ; still considering 
the exigencies of the case we ventured to lend a helping hand, ... al- 
though by so doing we pushed out . . . our legitimate business. I event- 
ually arranged, with the aid of Dr. Cabot, so as to take the risk of 
ordering, in all one hundred machines, at a cost of about three thousand 
dollars, taking our chances hereafter to raise the money. . . . 

I am free to say, had your letter . . . arrived forty-eight hours earlier, 
myself and others would have been little, if at all disposed to exert 
ourselves, ... to procure machines for the improvement of Lawrence. 
Rather we should have seconded the suggestion of one of our most 
influential coadjutors, which was to advise you and other friends to 
quit L., abandon it to its impending fate, and seek a location at another 
spot, where more harmony and good will will be likely to prevail. 

It would be curious to know who the influential coadjutor 
was that suggested abandoning Lawrence. Evidently not Mr. 
Lawrence; for he appears, by a memorandum in his own 
handwriting, dated August 24, 1855, to have subscribed $955 
" to make up the sum expended by me for rifles for the defence 
of the Kansas settlers." The list of these subscribers is in 
the handwriting of Dr. Samuel Cabot, and shows the follow- 


ing names, beside Mr. Lawrence's: John M. Forbes, $300, 
Gerrit Smith, $250, Dr. Cabot, $240, Wendell Phillips, Dr. 
W. R. Lawrence, Captain John Bertram of Salem, Samuel A. 
Eliot, Theodore Lyman, G. Howland Shaw, and Cunningham 
Brothers, each $100; Samuel Hoar of Concord, Henry Lee, 
and Calvin Hall, each $50 ; Judge E. R. Hoar, Dr. Le 
Baron Russell, and P. S. Crowell, each $25. The total of 
these subscriptions for the first hundred rifles, exclusive of Mr. 
Lawrence's, is $1,715 ; and it thus appears that, of the whole 
$2,670, for which Mr. Lawrence made himself responsible, 
$1,055 were paid by the two brothers Lawrence, with one of 
whom, Dr. Lawrence, I served for years as a member of the 
State Kansas Committee. Most of the subscribers were either 
officers or members of the Emigrant Aid Company, and the 
whole business was transacted at the office of that company in 
Winter Street. 

One of the last shipments of rifles, in the spring of 1856, 
was seized, on board the Missouri river steamboat Arabia, 
by a thousand armed Missourians at Lexington, and for some 
years kept out of the hands of the Kansas free-state men. 
D. S. Hoyt, of Deerfield, Massachusetts, who had charge of 
them, returned to St. Louis, libelled the steamer for the value 
of the rifles, and collected the money ; but the rifles remained 
useless in the custody of the Missourians. Mr. Lawrence 
wrote: "If we were not officers of the Emigrant Aid Com- 
pany, we could get them by suit; but whether we can do so 
by proxy remains to be seen." 

A few months later Hoyt was murdered on the plains of 
Kansas; and Brown, in his address to the Massachusetts leg- 
islature in February, 1857, said, "In August last I saw the 
mangled and shockingly disfigured body of the murdered Hoyt 
of Deerfield brought into our camp." The hundred rifles were 
finally recovered by the Emigrant Aid Company in the early 
part of 1859, and at the request of Martin Conway, an agent 
of the company, some time in the spring of 1859 were turned 
over to Captain James Montgomery, and employed by him in 
1860, during the border troubles at Fort Scott. Montgomery, 
a year earlier, using probably some of the rifles sent out from 
Boston in 1855, had, when pursued by United States dragoons 
in southern Kansas, turned upon them and put them to flight, 
killing two dragoons. This was the first and last time that 


the national soldiers were fired on or forcibly resisted by the 
free-state men of Kansas. Colonel Montgomery afterward 
commanded a Kansas regiment in the Civil War, and a colored 
regiment recruited among the freedmen of Carolina. After 
all his perils and exposures he outlived the wars, small and 
great, and died quietly in his bed at Mound City in Kansas. 
His portrait (the only one known) will be hereafter submitted. 
He visited me at Concord in 1857, and was introduced by me 
to Emerson, and to the scene of the Concord fight of 1775. 
His grandfather had fought among the New Hampshire troops 
at Bunker Hill ; his great-grandfather was out in the Jacobite 
rebellion of 1745, and had to emigrate from Scotland, — first 
to Ireland and then to New England. My friend himself was 
a slender, dark-complexioned person, of a certain elegance both 
of person and speech, reminding me of a French chevalier. 

Other rifles than the lot already mentioned were sent out 
from Boston by the officers of the Emigrant Aid Company, 
in August, 1855, and later. The whole sum recorded by Dr. 
Cabot, as raised for this purpose, was 112,444. Whether the 
list given above of the subscribers to a hundred rifles relates 
to those sent in May, or those of August, is left in doubt by 
Mr. Isely, but I think I am not wrong in applying it to the 
May shipment. The August shipment was also solicited by 
Robinson, through Major Abbott, and the request was granted 
by Mr. Lawrence, who wrote (August 11 and 20, 1855) as fol- 
lows to Major J. B. Abbott : 

Request Mr. Palmer to have one hundred Sharps rifles packed in 
casks, like hardware, and to retain them subject to my order. Also to 
send the bill to me by mail. I will pay it either with my note, accord- 
ing to the terms agreed on between him and Dr. Webb, or in cash less 
interest at seven per cent, per annum. 

[August 20.] This installment of carbines is far from being enough ; 
and I hope the measures you are taking will be followed up until every 
organized company of trusty men in the Territory shall be supplied. . . . 

You must dispose of these where they will do the most good, and for 
this purpose you should advise with Dr. Robinson and Mr. Pomeroy. 

I cannot find that John Brown, who certainly had an " or- 
ganized company of trusty men," made use of any of the rifles 
of 1855. He had supplied himself with arms in the early 
summer of 1855, on his way to Kansas with his son-in-law, 


Henry Thompson, who is yet living at Pasadena, California. 
Writing from Syracuse, New York, June 28, 1855, Brown 
said to his family at North Elba: 

I have met with a most warm reception from all, so far as I know, and 
(except by a few sincere, honest peace friends) a most hearty approval 
of my intention of arming my sons and other friends in Kansas. I re- 
ceived to-day donations amounting to a little over $60, — $20 from 
Gerrit Smith, $5 from an old British officer: 1 others giving smaller 
sums, with such earnest and affectionate expression of their good wishes 
as did me more good than money, even. 

In Akron he received gifts for arms, and also the artillery 
sabres which were afterwards used by his men in the Pottawa- 
tomie executions, the following May ; together with some in- 
fantry bayonets, too large to fit any of the Kansas muskets, 
but which he fastened to wooden handles, intending to use 
them as pikes to repel attack. With these, set up in a row on 
each side of his great wagon, he crossed the line of the invad- 
ing Missourians in December, 1855, when he led his six sons 
to the Wakarusa war, and received at Lawrence his commis- 
sion from Major-General Robinson. 

In a later communication I shall speak of the Emigrant Aid 
Society and its useful work in Kansas for a few years. It had 
less to do with the pioneer settlement and the final triumph of 
freedom in Kansas than we used to claim ; but its task was 
well performed, on the whole, and its agents at times rendered 
good service. 

Samuel A. Green presented a photographic copy of a sil- 
houette of Joseph Willard, President of Harvard University 
from 1781 to 1804, the gift of his grandchildren, Mr. Joseph 
Willard and Miss Susanna Willard ; and he also communi- 
cated the following extract of a letter from a great-grand- 
daughter, Miss Theodora Willard, dated at Cambridge on 
July 81, 1907 : 

As far as we know there are three originals, — one belonging to 
us, one to Harvard, and one to another branch of the family. The 
picture I brought to you last week is a photographic reproduction from 
our original, enlarged to just twice the size. My aunt and uncle had 
eight of these made, — one for you, one which has been framed in the 

1 Captain Charles Stewart, who had served under Wellington. 


same way and lately given to Harvard, and six for Mr. Henry W. 
Cunningham. . . . They also had fourteen copies, made the exact size 
of the original, for themselves and for various relatives ; and also two 
more copies, four times the size of the original, — one my aunt has 
kept, the other she had framed and lent to the exhibit of historical 
pictures, &c, sent to the Jamestown Exposition by the Colonial Dames. 
These very large copies are not as satisfactory as the smaller ones. 

At the request of Professor Norton, Dr. Green also presented, 
in the name of Mrs. J. A. Swan of Cambridge, two water-color 
drawings which represent a part of Summer and of Winter 
Streets, giving excellent views of Trinity Church as it formerly 
appeared. They are by the English artist Vautin, who resided 
in Boston for some years, near the middle of the last century, 
and gave instruction in drawing which was much esteemed. 
One of these water-colors is dated 1846, and the other was 
made a few years later. They are now given to the Society 
by the lady who has owned them ever since they were painted, 
and from whose pencil sketch one of them was made. She 
is the widow of the Rev. Joshua A. Swan (H. C. 1846), the 
daughter of the late Rev. R. M. Hodges (H. C. 1815), the 
sister of Dr. Hodges (H. C. 1847), and the mother of Mrs. 
Governor Russell. 

Grenville H. Norcross presented the following note: 

In the " Report on Canadian Archives " by Douglas Brym- 
ner, Archivist, for the year 1889, which contains the Private 
Diary of General Sir Frederick Haldimand, — in the original 
French and in an English translation, — Mr. Brymner calls 
attention to a passage in the Diary as follows: 

At page 213 of the diary, as printed in this Report, is a curious 
contribution to the history of the Yorktown capitulation, a strike 
among the carpenters in New York having delayed for a fortnight the 
departure of the fleet intended to co-operate with Cornwallis. 

The entry in Haldimand's Diary, made probably in 1786, as 
translated in the Report, is as follows : 

He [Robertson] is certain that he [Low] was among the first who 
returned to America, but afterwards was among the ranks of the govern- 
ment party and was very useful. Robertson 1 gave me a striking instance 

i James Robertson (17207-1788), Royal Governor of New York, 1779-1783, 
rose from the ranks until he became Lieutenant-General in 1782. 


of this. Our fleet which was at New York, required immediate repair 
in order to set sail to protect Lord Cornwallis ; there were not enough 
of workmen in the yard. Robertson proposed to collect all the car- 
penters and put them in charge of Mr. Low, who found a great many 
of them. But those in the yard would not receive them, so that the 
fleet lost a fortnight by the delay, which was partly the cause of Corn- 
wallis' misfortune. This anecdote is little known. This same Mr. 
Low engaged about 300 or 400 men in the Admiral's fleet when it 
set sail. 

Haldimand (1718-1791), a Swiss in the service of England, 
was the general to whom the Boston Latin School boys pro- 
tested against the destruction of their coast on Beacon Street 
in 1775. He was Governor of Canada from 1778 to 1784. 

The President presented, in behalf of Mr. William G. Brooks, 
a volume by John Cotton entitled " Practical Commentary, or 
an Exposition . . . upon The First Epistle Generall of John 
(London, 1656), containing the bookplate of his brother Phillips 
Brooks, a descendant of Cotton. 

The Council reported the appointment of Messrs. Charles C. 
Smith, Grenville H. Norcross, and Samuel S. Shaw as House 



The stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 12th instant, 
at three o'clock, p. M. ; the President in the chair. 

The record of the November meeting was read and approved ; 
and in the absence of the Librarian, the Corresponding Secre- 
tary read the list of donors to the Library during the past 

The President announced that the History of Chelsea, pre- 
pared by the late Judge Chamberlain, the publication of which 
was provided for by his bequest to the Society, is nearly ready 
to be published. 

John D. Long presented a memoir of Solomon Lincoln, 
and Edward Stanwood a memoir of Peleg W. Chandler. 

Barrett Wendell, in presenting some papers relating to 
Longfellow, spoke as follows : 

On behalf of Mrs. C. V. Jamison, of New Orleans, I have 
the honor to offer to the Society these papers, which record a 
deeply characteristic episode in the life of Longfellow. The 
story may best be told in her own words, from a letter which 
she has kindly sent me with them : 

The acquaintance began through my brother, who at that time had 
a large book-making establishment in Cambridge and often saw Mr. 
Longfellow in a business way. These frequent interviews about the 
printing of his books resulted in his being interested in my brother, 
who had an uncommonly fine mind, which the great scholar recognized 
and respected. 

Shortly before Mr. Longfellow left Cambridge for his last visit to 
Europe, he happened to visit my brother's office, and mentioned that 
he hoped to spend the following winter in Italy, whereupon my brother 
told him that I, his sister, was studying painting in Rome. He at once 
asked for my address, and kindly promised to call on me, when there, 
and to be useful to me in any way that he could. When he arrived in 
Rome, in the winter of '68-9, he remembered his promise, came to see 
me, and introduced me to his family and many of his friends. It is 
needless to say how helpful his friendship was to a young woman in a 


strange country, with little experience, and less confidence in her ability 
to accomplish what her immense ambition led her to undertake. My 
ambition was for art, and I had thought of writing only as a means 
of expressing what was hampered and confined by the drudgery of 
learning to paint. On one of his visits to me I showed him a little 
Italian sketch, just published in " Appleton's Journal," my first pub- 
lished article. He read it with great interest ; then he said, " You must 
write and it need not prevent your painting. Raphael wrote his hun- 
dred sonnets," and added more pleasant advice to that effect. 

I saw him frequently during the winter, in my own home, in 
society, and in the galleries where I copied, and had the joy of listen- 
ing to his delightful conversation and kindly criticisms, which always 
inspired and encouraged me to greater effort. When he was about to 
leave Rome, I told him that I was writing some descriptions of Italian 
towns which I hoped to make a book of when I returned home. He 
said that subject had been overdone, and advised me to introduce a 
story, with the places for a background. I followed his advice, and 
my first novel, " Woven of Many Threads," was the result. 

When I returned home, a year and a half later, I was staying for a 
short time with my sister in Braintree. There he came to see me, and 
we talked over the story and read parts of it, and before he left he 
made an appointment with me to meet him at Mr. Fields' office on a 
certain day. I went to the appointment with fear and trembling, and 
experienced the trying ordeal of reading several chapters of my story 
to an audience of two, Mr. Longfellow and Mr. Fields, and you can 
imagine my surprise and delight when that autocrat of publishers said 
he liked what I had read, and would accept it. 

The final arrangements were made, and it was put at once into 
the hands of the printer, and just as I was dreading proof sheets Mr. 
Fields told me that Mr. Longfellow had kindly offered to make the 
final corrections, and asked me if he should send me the sheets after- 
ward. I replied " No " emphatically, and I never saw them until they 
were sent to me after the book was published. 

This act of kindness, on the part of the most eminent 
American man of letters in the full height of his career, 
can be fully appreciated only by those who have despairingly 
struggled with their own proof. From that time till the end 
of his life he remained, in all Mrs. Jamison's literary work, 
a constant, helpful friend. 

When, last summer, she had the goodness to show me this 
proof, it seemed to me worthy of more certain preservation 
than could be assured it in private hands. Slight though the 
episode may seem, in the full history of Longfellow's career, 


none, I think, could more beautifully indicate those qualities 
of his which made him in his life, as in his memory, worthily 
beloved. At my suggestion, accordingly, she requests that 
this Society will accept the proof, corrected by his hand, 
together with the letters which he subsequently wrote her. 

M. A. De Wolfe Howe communicated the following paper 
on the bust of George Bancroft : 

Last spring our President told me that he had long been 
looking in vain for a bust of George Bancroft for the rooms 
of the Society, and invited such aid as I could render in the 
search. Up to that time I had seen in the records of Mr. 
Bancroft's life no reference to any sculpture of his head. 
The circumstances which led to the acquisition of the bust, 
unveiled at the November meeting, have at least the interest 
of processes known as the " longest way round," and at the 
President's request the}' are made the subject of this brief 

In October last I was happy to find among Mr. Bancroft's 
papers the photograph of what appeared to be a marble bust, 
under which the words, " Bancroft. R. S. Greenough Fecit," 
were inscribed. On the back of the picture was written, " Hon. 
George Bancroft, with Richard S. Greenough's compliments 
and cordial respect." The existence of a bust was no longer 
a matter of doubt ; but how was it to be secured for the rooms 
of the Society ? Instead of applying at once to a maker and 
seller of busts, the zeal of careful investigation led me to 
write to a grandson of Mr. Bancroft, asking where the Green- 
ough sculpture might be found. He promptly replied that a 
nephew of his grandfather — who is also a member of this 
Society — had asked him last year about the same bust, " but " 
— to quote from the letter — "I could not give him any in- 
formation. So far as I know I have never seen it. . . . Do 
you suppose it could be in the Harvard Library without any 
one knowing it ? " He touched on the unlikelihood of its being 
in the Worcester Art Museum or in Berlin, on the possibility 
of tracing it " from the Greenough end," and of waiting for it 
to turn up, as it undoubtedly would some day. 

A few days after receiving this letter, I found myself in the 
Harvard College Library, displayed the photograph which I 


had borne with me to Cambridge, and asked if any light could 
be thrown upon it there. I was immediately directed to the 
reading-room, where — somewhat larger than life — the bust, 
in bronze, stood in a conspicuous place. On its back are the 
words, " R. S. Greenough fecit, Roma, 1889," together with 
the founder's name. In 1889 Bancroft was eighty-nine years 
old, and had not been in Europe for fifteen years. 1 

It became my pleasure at once to inform our President that 
what had seemed so remote was thus near at hand. In response 
to the information he wrote, " There are few things more satis- 
factory than hunting a thing of this sort to earth," and en- 
trusted me with the task of securing a plaster cast of the 

Again it would have been simple to go direct to the dealers 
in plaster busts. Instead, it seemed proper to ask the librarian 
of Harvard College for permission to have the bronze repro- 
duced. His courteous reply was to the effect that a formal 
request should be made to the Corporation. He thought the 
work might be done in the basement of the Library, and that 
Caproni would be as good a man as any to do it. Accordingly 
I framed an application to the secretary of the Corporation, 
but before mailing it took the precaution of going to Caproni's 
warerooms to inform myself about the methods and cost of the 
undertaking. Again I displayed the photograph. The sales- 
man looked at it, led me into a rear room of the admirable 
establishment which employs him, pointed to a bust, and asked, 
" Is not that the thing you are looking for?" 

It was ; for some years it had been purchasable by any 
comer at a reasonable rate ; and in a few minutes the trans- 
action which brought the bust to these rooms was arranged. 
A "shorter way home" might have been discovered; yet it 
would have been to the entire sacrifice of the pleasures of 
the chase, and the loss of this fresh illustration of the fabled 
search in distant lands for what may be found close to one's 

William B. Weeden, a Corresponding Member, then read 
the following paper : 

1 Subsequent inquiry has shown that the bust was received by the College 
on September 24, 1889, from Mr. Greenough himself, and that he presumably 
modelled it from life at Newport. 


Early Oriental Commerce in Providence. 1 

The American Revolution opened the western world anew. 
Columbus had sought the East by way of the West. The 
Latin races went toward the tropics, but the Teutonic stocks 
developed a new life in North America, on the fertile shores 
of the Atlantic, and wrestled with the greatest power of 
Europe, until it achieved political independence. Such power 
and enterprise found new outlets in commerce. 

The English and Dutch East India Companies under severe 
monopolies had exploited the rich, productive shores of the 
Indian Ocean and the China seas. Enormous traffic carried 
their tropical products to the rising civilizations of Europe. 
The contests of Great Britain with the French Republic and 
with Napoleon were to try the commerce of neutrals — es- 
pecially in the East — very severely, as we shall perceive in 
a romantic voyage of the ship John Jay. Yet exchanges must 
go on. The iron, manufactured flax, and hemp from northern 
Europe, wines, liquors, and provisions, must reciprocate with 
tea, sugar, and spices, with the finer cotton fabrics made by 
teeming populations of workers, together with articles of 
luxury. These products were especially needed in New 

John Brown, famous in the Gaspee raid, who took powder 
from the British West Indies for Washington's use after 
Bunker Hill, was, next to Stephen Hopkins, our first citizen in 
the eighteenth century. The four brothers Brown pursued 
for half a century the West Indian commerce, which gave so 
much prosperity to New England. They made cannon and 
imported European supplies under contract with Congress for 
the Continental army. John, with his "magnificent projects," 
was the man for the occasion, and for commerce with the far 
East. New York began several years earlier, Salem was be- 
ginning, when Brown built the General Washington of some 
five hundred tons' burden and despatched her to Canton in 
1787. Fire and other accidents played havoc with his papers, 

1 Through the courtesy of the late M. B. I. Goddard and the present partners 
of the firm of Brown and Ives, I am able to embody this sketch of oriental trade, 
from original documents now in possession of the John Carter Brown Library, 


but by good fortune we have the log of the Washington, 

with this heading: 

Newport, Rhode Island, Dec. 27, 1787. 

A Journal of Passage from Newport to Madeira in the good ship 
Gen. Washington, Jonathan Donnison, Commander, and from thence to 
the further Indies and Canton. 

Do not imagine that prosaic freight and cargo, lunar obser- 
vations and tedious logarithms, were the only resources of 
these restless adventurers seeking far-away climes. Mr. 
Megee, the clerk, in elegant characters, recorded twelve max- 
ims on the fly leaf like these, "To the honest fellow that 
loves his bottle at night and his Business in the morning," and 
" To the True patriot who dies with pleasure for his Country's 

The voyage to Madeira passed without special incident. 
Wines and liquors were taken on board, and the anchor was 
weighed for the Cape, May 7, 1788. Careful entries of supplies 
taken from the cargo for the ship's use were recorded from 
day to day. A minute log was kept, and elaborate calculations 
of the navigation were entered. Whenever land was seen, 
the substantial accuracy of the lunar observations was verified. 
The General Washington arrived at Pondicherry on the 18th 
of July. On the beach were a great number of people 
"Dressed in long white gounds with Long sleeves." Captain 
Nicholas Gardiner took the officers to the coffee house, and 
they u went to see the Town." 

Colonel Ward, the supercargo, exchanged Madeira wine 
for ginseng, which was much desired in the Canton market. 
He sold wines for dry-goods, calicoes, and handkerchiefs. 
They found chintz, inferior to the samples, mixed and delivered 
with the regular goods. The ship arrived at Madras on the 
29th of July. On August 24 they sailed for Canton, which 
they reached on October 29. 

An interesting lay-out of an India voyage is prescribed by 
the supercargo, Colonel Ward probably, on August 24, 1788 : 

Ships should arrive on this coast in February or March, with assorted 
cargoes, packed to be easily gotten at. They should touch at Cape of 
Good Hope, Isle of France, Trincomalee, Trincabar, and all the ports 
along the coast, selling for cash. At Madras, they may contract for book 
muslin, at Coringo for long cloths, at Calcutta for Muslins, Callicoes, 
Bengauls, Romals, bandannoes, &c, at Pondicherry for blue cloths, 


coarse hdkfs and nicannees. Freight may be had on the Coast of Coro- 
mandel at any time. Vessels to the Cape of Good Hope or Isle of 
France should bring a large proportion of beef and tar ; both sell well. 
At the Cape, Isle of France, and Pondicherry, there are no duties or 
port charges. At Madras, the duty is 5 % on every article, with great 
expenses of landing and porterage besides the United Power of the In- 
dians and English to Cheet you as much as they Can. The pilotage at 
Calcutta is about $500 or $600 for a ship of size, beside other expenses 
at the Port. 

Vessels arriving late, not only have a bad market in which to sell, 
but must buy goods, which are the leavings of the East India Company. 
One must employ "an Indian called a Debauch" and watch him close. 
Cheating is accomplished not openly but by combining with the Buyer 
and Innumerable number of other methods. Agree in advance on a 
hire fixed by the Police. Indians are as described, and as Europeans 
mostly go to India for a fortune, it may not be thought Uncharitable to 
Regard them in the same light. Old Teneriffe wine will bring as much 
at Pondicherry as Madeira. 

Casks of the latter eight or ten gallons short were filled with 
Teneriffe on the ship, and the taster knew no difference. It 
was the same with New England rum, at Madras, which was 
probably mixed with Jamaica. 

Exchange varies in these Ports, but at Madras in general 10 pagodas 
being 16§ to 16f dollars. The nominal pagoda is 8s. sterling, which 
it brings in goods, while in cash it is only equal to 7s. 6d. Bar iron 
should be 1 6 to 20 feet long, 2^ to 3 inches wide and J inch thick ; 
when it is worth 12 to 15 pagodas the candy of 500 lbs. In one 
vessel 50 tons is a suitable importation. Likewise about 400 casks of 
brandy, 20 to 30 gallons each. The same quantity of New England 
rum, but call it West India, as they cannot tell the difference. 

In Jamaica rum, 50 or 60 small casks may be taken. All spirits 
must be of the best quality and a high color, and but few cordials are 
wanted. Madeira is the best wine in India, commanding 60 to 90 
pagodas per pipe, while good old Teneriffe sells at 60 to 70. In 
anchors, the market is full, generally 4 per cwt. Cordage sells surely 
at a small profit. Porter is better in English casks than bottles, fetch- 
ing 10 to 12 pagodas per hhd. Sperm candles do not answer very 
well, if costing low they will pay freight. Tar in the best order brings 
3|- to 4 pagodas per bbl. No chocolate. Cider fined before the bottles 
are corked, in small boxes, will sell at 2^- to 2 pagodas per dozen. The 
best beef at 8 to 10 pagodas per bbl, a few barrels of Jew Beef would 
always sell. Pork, butter, cheese, codfish, pickled salmon, mackeril, 


haras, all of the very best and in small quantities. Ship a few bbls of 
the best Philadelphia flour and a few kegs of crackers. Large quanti- 
ties of gin will always sell at 4 to 8 pagodas per case. Cannon — 2, 3, 
4 pounders with carriages complete — are good merchandise. Sheet 
copper is contraband, and sells for 70 pagodas for 500 lbs. Nails 8d 
and lOd and other hardware are good. Some dried apples will sell at 
a great profit. Tobacco sells well at the Isle of France for 8d to lOd. 
per lb. The price of cotton at Bombay is 30 Tales for 750 lbs. 

The Washington took on board cotton for Canton, and some 
sancl for ballast. She was landing cargo at Canton in Decem- 
ber, 1788, and began loading for her return on the 16th. 
The cargo for the owners consisted of tea, china, and lac- 
quered ware. As the accounts of the projected voyage are 
lost, we can only mention the large shipment for Samuel 
Shaw, probably the consul at Canton at this time, of teas, 
silks, nankins, china, and lacquered ware. This shipment was 
more important than that of the owners. Captain Donnison's 
venture was in china, arrack, and tea. Supercargo Ward's 
venture was in teas, china, and candy. 

On January 22, 1789, the crew were stowing teas and 
chocking the after hold, " which now Completes all for this 
time thank God." Passage home through the strait of Sunda 
began on the 29th. On February 6 Timor in the archi- 
pelago was reported, and boats were sent for wood to some of 
the islands. They ran aground and spent the night on shore 
with "a burnfire to keep off the Tigers and masceters." On 
February 13 both Sumatra and Java were in sight, and next 
day they obtained a large buffalo for seven dollars at a small 
island. On the 18th they anchored close under the shore of 
Sumatra; and the market yielded one turtle, fifteen fowls, and 
a monkey in exchange for two Guinea guns and a " King's 
arm." They sailed for the West Indies on February 20. 

Occasionally a " boneater " (bonito) or a turtle was caught, 
and once a dolphin. A rumbling noise in the air was supposed 
to be caused by an earthquake. On April 4 the land appeared 
at Natal, seven leagues distant. The lunar observation two 
days previous was confirmed, and the ship's reckoning corrected 
accordingly. The figures of navigation, closely tabulated, 
often filled two folios. 

On April 20 the anchor went down in twenty fathoms, and 
water was taken on board. Captain Donnison and the pas- 


sengers were on shore by permission of the Governor. The 
ship Albion, one of the fastest of the East India Company's 
fleet, sailed, and supercargo Ward landed two chests of tea. 
On May 9, at the island of Ascension, they met a whaler, 
Captain Folger of Halifax. She had two sperm whales on 
deck, and was throwing over common oil to save spermaceti. 
The Washington gave casks and hogsheads, in exchange for two 
casks of oil. On June 7 she made the island of Nevis and 
anchored at St. Eustatius in twelve fathoms. On the 16th 
they landed nankins, tea, and gunpowder, and received rum 
and dry-goods. 

The Washington sailed from St. Eustatius on June 17, and 
passed Newport, firing seven guns, at two o'clock in the after- 
noon of July 6, having sailed 32,914 miles in eighteen months, 
ten days, with only one man lost on her voyage to the East 

As John Brown, trained in West Indian commerce and 
large Revolutionary affairs, was an ideal pioneer in the East, 
so Thomas Poynton Ives was the new merchant and man of 
method for a business which was to join the United States 
to India and China in an endless chain, with links at St. 
Petersburg and Amsterdam, at Lisbon and many other ports. 
Taught in the office of Nicholas Brown and Company, brother- 
in-law and partner of Nicholas the younger, he became the 
junior of Brown, Benson and Ives in 1792. There was ample 
wealth inherited to afford capital for large transactions. Mr. 
George Benson withdrew in 1795, and Ives was almost wholly 
responsible in conduct of the business for some two-score years. 
He was the typical merchant of the early nineteenth century, 
before steam communication by water and land changed the 
methods of the time. Not lacking in the shrewd capacity of 
buyer and trader, he rose above traffic to the ample forecast of 
a commanding merchant. 

We have followed an Indiaman through an experience of 
eighteen months ; such a vessel might pass two or three years 
before captain or supercargo could report at the office of 
Brown and Ives. Vessels carried triplicate letters, if by any 
chance news or information might hit the far off adventurers. 
The great powers of Europe engaged in deathly struggles, 
and sought in every way to embarrass the commerce of neu- - 
trals by tracking its precarious course among the belligerents. 


Something more than a trader's touch must possess a plan for 
these far-away voyages ; the strategic insight of a true mer- 
chant must bring out the greatest result with least risk. The 
letter of instructions as put forth by Mr. Ives was a plan of 

Generally, the supercargo represented the merchant, having 
supreme authority in all things, except in navigation and the 
management of the crew. Direction of the voyage and every- 
thing appertaining to cargo were under his control, and the 
captain was ordered explicitly to act accordingly. Rarely 
captain and supercargo were given joint management of the 
business on shore. In the short auxiliary voyages to Europe 
the captain was usually his own supercargo, and received 
special pay for transacting business in port. In the com- 
merce with the West Indies, a " privilege " for small ventures 
was given the officers, and in some instances to a few of the 
crew. In this trade the vessels were generally of three hun- 
dred to five hundred tons' burden and rigged as ships. The 
brig Eliza, one-hundred and thirty-eight tons, was an excep- 
tion. The East India Company carried on its traffic in much 
larger craft. 

The ship Arthur, three hundred and five tons, sailed in 
January, 1802. Her captain, Scott Jenckes, was also virtu- 
ally responsible as supercargo. He had six tons' privilege of 
shipment under deck and $3000, paying his assistant (or 
clerk) $100 therefrom, "No other compensation 1 whatever." 
Generally the captain received from $50 to $55 per month, 
with privileges and occasional commissions. In this voyage 
the mate had three tons' privilege and $35 a month ; the second 
mate, one ton and $25 ; eight seamen, eight to ten feet, and 
$16; four sailors, some privileges and $18; two boys, $8 and 
$10. Then, as now, fine cooking was expensive, for the artist 
serving the cabin received $32, while his co-laborer nourish- 
ing the crew got only $14. Generally, wages for fully two 
months was advanced before sailing. 

The privileges or ventures, of increased value at home, 
were important in amount. Captain Jenckes's shipment of 
fancy articles, including a pipe of Madeira, cost $1948.16 ; 
and twelve sailors sent cheaper goods at $1364. One sailor, 

1 Thompson, resident in Canton, received $3000 for purchasing a cargo for 
the Isis, a similar ship, in 1803. 


Stephen Chase, managed to get $600 worth of high-priced 
wares into his narrow space. Captain B. G. Dexter's venture 
in the voyage of the John Jay in 1800 was insured for $2500, 
and occupied eight feet by eight by five in space, at forty 
feet a ton. 

Let us look into the voyage of the John Jay, built in 1794, 
of four hundred and sixty-five tons' burden, which sailed from 
Providence for Canton on April 9, 1797. The letter of in- 
structions from Brown and Ives, dated on April 8, is ad- 
dressed to Captain Daniel Olney and John Bowers, joint 
supercargoes. I shall merely indicate briefly the salient 
points : 

Proceed to Canton. Inform Loo Mouqua and Geouqua that you have 
money to pay our obligations. If they are now in good standing, apply 
to either to become your security. Place the cargo in their hands, 
trading it for goods in return if possible. Contract for their paying 
the port charges out of the property. Probably they will be pleased 
with our punctuality and readily engage on further credit. If the pas- 
sage be long and the notes are overrun, pay interest. From the 
precarious state of the Navigation of this country with respect to Con- 
tending powers, we send small funds relying on your negotiating Bs/Exch 
on us at Amsterdam. L/C are now delivered. Make drafts on us pay- 
able in America at 9 or 12 mos. sight, for the Ship must be filled. 

For balance of loading not paid for, we prefer to buy from China 
merchants [as in last voyage], they taking the risque to this country. 
If the ship is lost, they lose ; arriving safe, we send out money for the 
debt. For a return cargo, we prefer 1500 chests very first quality 
Bohea Tea — about 360 lbs. ea, the chest weighing 60 lbs. to 64 lbs. 
Also 50 to 60 tons good sugar, in double matted bags for ballast. China 
ware being sold for cash, take 10 or 15 tons only, chiefly Dining Setts, 
some tea cups and saucers in handsome patterns, One box pitchers with 
Covers 1 to 3 quarts. One Box Nankin cups and saucers — Coffee and 
Tea. Bohea you must increase as you fall short. Be very particular 
in the quality of Teas. 500 chests best Hyson, 500 ch best Young 
Hyson, 500 to 100 ch best Hyson Skin, 50 ch Souchong best, 20 or 30 
ch best Imperial or Gunpowder. 50,000 ps Yellow Nankins 2d Chop, 
or more if you are in funds. 10,000 ps white do. If you buy Silks, 
follow patterns enclosed, but we prefer black Lutestrings, as recom- 
mended by John and Thomas Amory. 

Take freight in fine goods to America, being sure it is real American 
property. Avoid giving cause to Belligerent cruisers on either side. 
If teas are surely genuine, stamp Ship's name on each chest. The direc- 
tions to sustain repute of John Jay teas are urgent. Look at weight, 


for after last voyage the chests fell short. Neither weight nor tare 
should be on the chest. You must constantly attend to the packing 
and weighing of Teas. Wm. Taylor goes as your Assistant, to be at 
the Factory in Canton and will help in supervising the Teas. Economy 
is necessary ; keep Factory and other expenses as low as possible. We 
give form for Certificate of Landing, for articles entitled to Drawback. 
We owe Loo Mouqua $8052.50, Geouqua $19,949.33, also we are to 
pay $2642 given by Benj. Munro on the last voyage of John Jay. 
Should the times become settled, we shall send out a further sum of 
money. Perhaps you can invest $10,000 conditionally on its going 
this season possibly, or surely next season. 

Bring 1/2 and 1/4 chests of Bohea only to have the smaller sizes for 
stowing. The Custom House allows 20 lbs. tare on fine teas ; the weight 
should be 17 lbs. or 18 lbs. We expect to see you in 11 or 12 months. 
Bs/Ex are enclosed on Thos. Dickason & Co., Londou at 9 to 12 months 
for £5000 on John Hodson & Son at 12 months for $60,000. L/C for 
Olney and Bowers Supercargoes $40,000. Specie shipped on board, 
$50,000. 1 

We are confident that our ample shipment of funds will give further 
credit at Canton. This ship must be perfectly full. Break up Nankins 
to fill every crevice. The sugar ordered for ballast should not interfere 
with Bohea, as the tea pays better. We hope for accommodation with 
the French. Don't you venture among the Islands as others have done. 
Good Young Hyson is the most profitable tea, if at the former price 26 
Tale. We send you by the Jenny $5000 additional. 

The best-laid plans " gang aft a-gley," were hardly ever worse 
than in this instance, as it happened. In May, Brown and 
Ives were obliged to notify Olney and Bowers that the George 
Washington, the ship sent out by Brown and Francis had ar- 
rived from Batavia, without going on to Canton, on account 
of the great advantages offered. Brown and Ives's specie, sent 
by this vessel, was left over at Batavia to be forwarded to 
Canton next season. The thrifty merchant, wishing to save 
interest, had despatched his specie in advance by way of 
Batavia, instead of keeping it for the certain destination of his 
own vessel. The consequences were disastrous to the projected 
voyage of the John Jay, as will appear. 

The John Jay took out a small cargo, about nineteen tons 
of lead, one hundred and fifty cases of gin, forty boxes sperm 

1 It was received at Canton, one dollar short and two counterfeit dollars 


candles, ten anchors, six quarter casks of sherry, and thirty 
and a half pipes Madeira, which was landed on October 4-7. 

According to the portage bill of April 9, she carried thirty- 
four persons beside the supercargo and clerk. Captain 01 ney 
received $ 16 a month wages, with a " privilege " of four tons. 
Without doubt he was paid more by a private contract, as he 
was joint supercargo. In another voyage the supercargo's pay 
was $3000. The whole outlay for thirteen months to May 9, 
1797, was $6442.29. 

This was the John Jay's second voyage to Canton. She 
mounted six six-pound guns, six fours, four swivels, and was 
furnished with muskets, pistols, cutlasses, pikes, etc. On April 
26 a " Shipe of Force" bore down upon her, when all hands 
were called to quarters, and the guns were cleared for action. 
Outsailing her enemy, she got free in the night. Although 
the orders were positive not to speak any vessel, they sent this 
news by a whaler unexpectedly met on the 2d of June. De- 
tained by calms and adverse winds, they stopped sixty hours 
for water in the strait of Allass, August 20, and sent a " pro- 
test" from Canton for the insurers. The ship arrived at 
Whampoa September 21. 

On November 6, 1797, the first report being at an earlier 
date, John Bowers for himself and Captain Olney reported 
the misfortune incurred by the change of the Washington's 
course at Batavia, which left Brown and Ives's specie there, 
when it was desperately wanted at Canton. This vexatious 
miscarriage caused failure of the voyage as it was projected at 
Providence. They had not received the $10,000 sent out by 
Jenny and Pigon. Having paid the obligations of Snow and 
Olney in 1796, their funds remaining were so reduced that Loo 
Mouqua and Geouqua " Neglect us," recommending applica- 
tion to other Hong merchants to " secure " the ship. Exchange 
and letters of credit were of no avail, specie being so scarce 
that the East India Company's paper sold at twenty per cent 
discount, and bills on Amsterdam were no better. 

The best offer from Geouqua demanded $80,000 in cash, and 
he would grant $40,000 more on same credit as in 1796, say 
twenty per cent advance, and he would risk the property to 
America, while we were to risk the money out, to be paid in 
twenty months. Unless we could pay the $80,000, he " would 
have no concern with us." The Hong merchants were so in- 


volvecl that goods could not be had unless the buyer advanced 
two-thirds in specie. 

On October 3 they had a large ship at great expense not 
" secured " and no business done. Therefore thev were neo:o- 
tiating a charter-party for a neutral ship to Hamburg with a 
Dane ; and enclosed certificates of landing and account of sales 
of their cargo to Ponqua their " security." The cargo brought 
$5789.14, payable in fine teas. The proceeds in teas, silks, 
and nankins were sent home by Captain Wheatland, seventeen 
tons, ten feet, ten and a half inches at $90 per ton, — $1554.46. 
They agreed to pay the Grand Hoppo's (Governor of Can- 
ton) charges, $4200. These charges were laid on a tonnage 

Eight provinces of the Empire of China had been at war with 
the Tartars for some twelve months, though it had no great 
effect on the foreign trade. The charter-party was concluded 
with Fabritius and others of Copenhagen. It assigned them 
the whole tonnage of the hold, stern sheets, half deck, great 
cabin, reserving for the owners fifteen tons in the hold, room 
for provisions, water, cables, etc., under deck, also the whole 
round house on the poop-deck and the forecastle : destination 
Hamburg, to carry goods, china ware, teas, and china root ; 
measurement seven hundred and fifty tons at forty English 
square feet a ton, at a freight of $75,000, Spanish milled at 
4/6 sterling within thirty-three days after arrival ; tonnage 
more or less pro rata at $100 a ton. The actual freight 
collected was $71,120fi. 

On October 31, 1797, there w 7 ere eleven American vessels 
at Whampoa of 3438 tonnage. The next in size to the John 
Jay was the Ocean of New York, four hundred and twenty 
tons, the smallest being the brig Eliza of Providence one 
hundred and thirty-seven tons. The East India Company had 
fourteen ships each of twelve hundred tons, of superior ton- 
nage. In addition there were from England twenty country 
ships, as they were called. 

On the 29th of November our voyagers cleared for the 
strait of Sunda. " Xraas morn a Merry one to all my Friends, 
no Church Bells or Anthems," wrote Mr. Bowers in elegant 
letters. The dinner was of roast goose, boiled beef and pork, 
fine baked -rice pudding, and oranges. Another day turtle 
soup was served, but " the best dishes do not go down well 


with me in Tempestuous weather." On the 13th he was 
fatigued with reading the " History of the Decline and Fall 
of the Roman Empire." 

On January 29, 1798, sunrise over the table-land of Good 
Hope was a " beautiful prospect," though they did not go on 
shore, much to the disappointment of our diarist. They had 
made 7376 miles from Whampoa in sixty-one days, twenty-two 
hours. The Sunday following, he was reading Sterne and the 
Holy Bible. On February 11 St. Helena was seen from the 
round house about ten leagues off, " this blessed Land Fall 
confirmes our Lunar observations." He is very enthusiastic 
concerning the lunar method, 9101 miles from Whampoa, 
seventy-five da}-s. The distance from Block Island to Canton 
direct was computed at 13,661 miles. 

On February 22 he wrote, " Sixty sixth year of George 
Washington Esquire's Age — while Gratitude remains in the 
Human Breast, The Praises of Washington shall Dwell on 
every Tongue." The sea diet was varied by sharks, dolphins, 
and porpoises, whenever they were caught. On May-day they 
saw no land, but anchored on the shoal now known as Dogger 
Bank. Bowers was "so intent reading Rousseau's New 
Eloisa" that he did not perceive the dropping of the anchor. 

The John Jay arrived at Hamburg on May 9, 1798, after a 
passage of one' hundred and sixty-two days, when the grand 
secret of the voyage was revealed in advices sent home. It 
had been carefully veiled in previous letters, which might have 
beencapturedby belligerent vessels. They had avoided ports, 
and now learned that the French took all American ves- 
sels. Through failure in receiving the expected specie at 
Canton, this quasi-neutral voyage had been the " last alter- 
native " to a heavy loss. In every letter of instruction to a 
supercargo Thomas P. Ives concluded, "If in destination, 
sale, or purchase, any better opportunity offers, follow your 
own judgment." He would almost always "recommend" in- 
stead of command, excepting when he would keep a vessel 
from breaking the regulations of neutrality. 

All the documents delivered to the Dutch East India Com- 
pany showed a contract with M. P. Fabritius to deliver the 
cargo at Hamburg for the account and risk of Conrad Fabritius 
and Company, Copenhagen. But a private letter informed 
that those interested must read R. F. Dozy for M. P. Fabritius 


and members of the Dutch East India Company for Conrad 
Fabritius and Company. On the 18th the company acknowl- 
edged this as "very agreeable," though preferring "directly 
into an harbour of this Republic, to save expense." Bowers 
subsequently wrote this was not possible, as the charter-party 
prescribed Hamburg, the loading at Canton being suspected as 
intended for the Dutch Company. 

Efforts to sell the ship failed, and they dreaded going to St. 
Petersburg so late in the season. On June 15 they wrote 
Tysberg and Company, Copenhagen, " the situation with the 
Republic of France continues to remain in so Critical a manner 
we know not what way to employ the ship." 

On April 3, 1798, new instructions are sent from Brown and 
Ives, who were much disappointed at the failure in Canton. 
The owners were obliged to pay twenty-five per cent to get a 
part of the risk covered to Europe. 

Get freight from Hamburg to India if possible, placing the proceeds 
in the hands of Thomas Dickason & Co., London, provided political 
circumstances render it secure. Should not freight worth while be 
offered, we recommend buying Bohea at not over 26 c per lb, and 
returning here. You can take freight to New York, but it will be safer 
to come to Rhode Island. The times are very critical and it appears 
highly probable that this Country will be forced against it Interest and 
wish to take part in the War. You perceive we prefer freight to any 
purchase. You may go to Batavia for Coffee and Sugar ; or you may 
get a freight of arrack there for Canton, as is frequent; then take 
Bohea home. If necessary sell the ship, if at $15,000. 

On July 16 Bowers and Olney reported that the " great 
prospect " of selling the ship had failed, and it was decided to 
go to St. Petersburg, though it would not answer to bring 
Russian goods to Hamburg. In consequence of a French 
privateer being taken by Americans, it was expected that 
France would declare war against the United States. Ready 
to sail on July 17, they arrived at Copenhagen on August 4, 
and at St. Petersburg August 15, 1798. Insurance to America 
was fifteen to seventeen per cent. It was reported on the 22d 
that the French Directory had stopped cruisers in the capture 
of American ships. 

They took the usual cargo of iron, hemp, cordage, sail cloth, 
etc., and the pilot for Elsinore came on board September 1, 


1798. Now their fitful and perplexing voyage, embarrassed by 
warring states, was to be complicated anew by perils of the sea. 
The next advice to Brown and Ives was dated at Lisbon on 
November 13. A quick run was made from Elsinore, when a 
leak in the lumber port was discovered, which spoiled some 
hemp. On the 2d of September a heavy gale sprung the rud- 
der and obliged the captain to seek the nearest port for 
repairs. Bowers wrote in the log on the 4th, " I hope God will 
protect us and enable us to get into port in a few days, This 
dreadfull, dreadfull circumstance, having been 19 months from 
home." These wandering pilgrims had not always the facile 
pen of Mr. Bowers, who could appreciate Sterne and Rous- 
seau ; but evidences of sincere piety and the highest sense of 
duty are frequent. 

Obliged to get out sufficient cargo at Lisbon to lift the 
lumber port and stop leakage, they struggled through the 
Catholic holidays and very sluggish working days. At last 
they are ready to sail on January 5, and arrived in New York 
on March 3, 1799. Advice was given E. J. Smith and Com- 
pany, St. Petersburg, that their furs would be carefully kept 
for autumn sales; they were too high-priced for the American 
market. Distance from Elsinore to Block Island was set down 
at 3500 miles. On the 8th our diarist left New London by the 
mail stage, and arrived in Providence at eight o'clock in the 
afternoon. " I found all my Relations and friends in health 
after a Tedious absence of 23 months. Thus ends my Journal 
with thanks to God for all his services." 

In contrast with this constrained, distorted, and vacillating 
voyage, though it was profitable, we may study the adventures 
of the same ship in 1800, when affairs went more smoothly. 
This enterprise was conducted jointly, two-thirds by Brown 
and Ives, one-sixth by John Innes Clark, one-sixth by Munro, 
Snow and Munro. Several such joint concerns are recorded 
about this time, Brown and Ives generally taking two-thirds 
interest. Probably the partition was to divide risks in these 
troublous times, for it could not have been necessary in pro- 
viding capital which was abundant. Gibbs and Channing, 
sometimes associated, were a substantial house : but Munro, 
Snow and Munro failed a few years later, and could not have 
added much strength. 

Brown and Ives chartered the ship consigning her to Samuel 


due Oct. 3, 1800 



l( 1 i( 
x 1 



(t 2, « 



" 3, « 



Snow, May 15, then consul at Canton, under these instructions 
to Benjamin G. Dexter, master, with letter to Mr. Snow : 

We hand invoice and B/L cordage and duck, which you may sell if 
possible at New Holland, and carry proceeds to S. S. We have sent 
him in specie $40,000, by three vessels, for our debts at Canton. 
These are due as follows 

to Loo Mouqua, Feb. 13, 1799 
Consequa Jan. 31, 
Ponqua Feb. 2, 

Pinqua " 3, 

These obligations were contracted by Samuel Snow, and if he has 
deceased or left Canton, you will apply the specie to them. If you sell 
cordage &c at New Holland, get a certificate of landing. Any balance 
put in Silks and Nankins for the John Jay. The vessel is well pre- 
pared and we do not expect that you will lay out for repairs, excepting 
from the stores on board. 

Instructions to Samuel Snow, on May 12: 

We hand B/L of cargo, also of $90,000 specie. Captain Dexter 
goes by New Holland touching at Botany Bay, and selling cargo if 
possible. The ship must be completely filled and you may negotiate 
for any deficiency in funds, in bills on us paj^ble in London, Ham- 
burgh or United States, at 12 months sight or more, at a discount not 
exceeding 12^%: or if you think best, on credit payable in Canton, as 
long as you can, without interest if possible; and at risk of the Sellers, 
until the goods arrive here. In our memo of the Return Cargo, there 
is a small quantity of Bohea. "By no means increase this, rather 
reduce, if much has been shipped this season; as it is now selling in 
New York at 32^ and is dull. Bohea as well as the fine grades must 
be of the very best and fresh. See that the whole is well packed, and 
is of full weight. Employ a confidential lad from the shop to attend to 
weight, when you are engaged. Ballast with sugar and china; the 
sugar being of the first sort and closely packed. Tea sets of china may 
be stowed, where it would not be prudent to put Nankins or fine goods. 
Consult Captain Dexter in stowing, and get articles adapted thereto. 

We hope he can sail with a strong convoy, if alone it would be pru- 
dent to avoid the Streights of Sunda. There is prospect of ending our 
difficulties with France, but negotiations may be long. Our Commis- 
sioners have arrived in Paris and were well received, according to 
report. Yet it may be sometime before Hostilities cease beyond the 
Cape and the utmost caution will be necessary in arranging the return 
passage. Impress on Captain Dexter the necessity of good stowage ; 



breaking up Nankins as well as bundles of Fans. Have them in addi- 
tional oiled paper, if necessary. Respecting Silks, refer to ours by- 
Ann & Hope for deception practised. Nankins are safe, therefore 
increase, if they are under $50. You quote your terms for transacting 
business at 3%, we consent. 

The Gensang and other articles Captain Dexter may carry, we hope 
may be sold well, and enable you to pay the Expenses without 
impairing the Capital. Attend to certificates of Landing for Draw- 
backs or Bounty. The penalty on the Exportation Bond is heavy, and 
Custom House officers are very particular. 

We think the time needed for despatching the John Jay will be 
within 6 weeks. Possibly you may have left your business to Thomas 
Thompson ; in that event, we direct that he follow this letter. The 
insurance out is now about 10%, and from Canton home it is the same. 
By consent of the proprietors of John Jay's present voyage, we have 
sent a small quantity of Duck and Cordage, to be sold for our account 
and remitted in Fine Teas, Nankins or Silks. Ship by some good 
vessel to America ; or failing this send in silks by John Jay, as taking 
least room. Respecting your plan for forming a Company to trade to 
Canton, we think it will not answer at present ; nor can it be done 
now, a favourable time may come. It is reported that the Directors 
of the East India Co. intend to break up their establishment, when the 
ship now out returns from Calcutta. They send no ship to Canton ; 
probably finding it will not answer their expectations. 

Additional instructions in behalf of the proprietors were 
given Captain Dexter at Providence, on May 13 ; the ship 
sailed on the 15th: 

Go to Canton by the Eastern Pass around New Holland and Norfolk 
Island, and deliver to Samuel Snow. We recommend avoiding the 
Cape, Isles of France and Bourbon ; also to avoid cruisers and the 
speaking of any vessels. If you meet hostile vessels we shall rely on 
your defending the ship and Property to the utmost of your power — 
the officers of the John Jay, we have no doubt, will duly second your 
efforts. In choosing rout around New Holland, two motives influence 
us, 1st, to avoid Cruisers passing Streights of Sunda ; 2nd, the advan- 
tage of trade at New Holland, getting money or exchange for the out- 
ward cargo. Probably a stop of 4 or 5 days will do, for trade and 
wood with water. We expect that you will reach Canton in 6 months. 
Very particular directions are given for stowage. Mr. Fry under- 
stands stowing the vessel, having been in her. Privileges are to be 
carefully watched, and you will suffer no buying or selling. Seamen's 
chests are commonly 3^ ft. to 3| ft. long, 2£ ft. broad at bottom, per- 
haps 2 to 2\ ft. at top. Larger must not be allowed on any account, 


not even on deck. Chief Officer, Mr. Fry, in case of accident is to 
command and follow these instructions. No advances are to be made 
to the crew, excepting for sickness or distress. Your wages and Priv- 
ilege cover all compensation, including the sale of goods in New 

Brown and Ives chartered the "private armed vessel" reg- 
istering 463g 2 g tons, with sails, boats, armament, etc., the 
owners taking two-thirds interest, John Innes Clark one-sixth, 
Munro, Snow and Munro one-sixth. The latter one-third to 
pay Brown and Ives at the rate of $2.25 per ton for each 
month, payable ninety days after discharge ; and to take risk of 
one-third after May 1. If the vessel should be lost, her value 
would be $22,000. If the voyage should be over in sixteen 
months, the charterers might take her at the valuation without 
charter money. Owners were to furnish two-thirds and the 
others one-third of the outfit. Out of the unusually large 
company of thirty-six, thirty -one persons had a " privilege," 
the largest proportion I have found in this commerce. In- 
structions were given the captain, in case of attack " to defend 
the property to the utmost." 

A scheme for the return cargo was always in Thomas P. 
Ives's own hand, or so altered by him that it showed original 
work. On this occasion he laid out the " proposed return 
cargo." Here is the return as it was made from Canton. The 
purchases varied the proportions somewhat, as the consignee 
was obliged to contract in advance for the tea crop : 

125 Chests 100 1/2 do 100 1/4 do Bohea . . $9,483.50 
1005 Chests Hyson $30,766.87 1334 ch. Sou- 
chong $38,727.59 69,494.46 

2120 Chests Hyson Skin $36,174.31 186 ch 

Young Hyson $5753.08 41,927.39 

16 Chests Gunpowder, $899.16 24 ch Sou- 
chong 1st qual $96.66 995.82 

10 Chests Padry $347.75 50 Boxes Chulong 

$450 797.75 

18 Boxes Silks, $8912. 7 Boxes Lacquered 

Ware 1 $283.75 9,195.75 

10,000 pieces white 64000 ps Brown 700 ps 

blue Nankins 38,253.00 

China ware $2973.50 Sundries, $1314.20 . 4,287.70 

Total $174,435.37 

i This ware brought $851.25. 


The outward cargo as sold in Canton was as follows: 

N. E. Rum $1091.83 Gin, $1480 Ginsang, 

$1637.06 $4,208.89 

Sherry, Tobacco 494.37 6 hhds. Tobacco 

$447.96 Do Manf. $214.80 .... 662.76 

1 hhd. Loaf Sugar 49 Loaves at 29 lbs. . . 138.46 

Sperm Candles $545.25 Provisions $5026.50 

Tar, $120 ........... 5,691.75 


Market prices at Canton Oct 29, 1800. 
Gunpowder Tea 60 Tale, Hyson 45, Young Hy. 34/36, Hyson Skin 
26/27, Souchong 36/40, Confu 28, Campoi 30, Nankins $63, Sugar 
4 tales 5 mace to 5 Tale, Dutch Camblets $50 per piece — English 
$30 and falling. Ginseng $140. Dark Blue Broadcloth $1 per covet; 
Purple 1|-, Scarlet lj, Light Blue $2, Black 1|, Light Brown l£, Sea 
Otter $19, Seal Skin 80 c. and both very dull. 

Captain Dexter reported his arrival at Canton on December 
6, 1800, when there were reports of peace between the United 
States and France which lacked confirmation. On Decem- 
ber 27 Mr. Snow advised that the ship would be loaded by- 
January 20, and that the net proceeds of Captain Dexter's sales 
in New South Wales were £4179. 1. 9. Bills on Europe 
were dull and he had offered them at twelve and a half per 
cent discount, dollars being in great demand. The ancient 
sway of the Spanish dollar in the Orient will suggest specula- 
tion regarding the future there of the United States coin. 

Snow had reduced the small articles included in the scheme 
of cargo, but a substantial sum in cash yet would be necessary. 
The remainder of outward cargo, then on hand, say $4450, 
would about pay the " Measurement of the ship and the Grand 
Hoppo's Cumshaw." If the bills could not be sold, there 
would be pressure for money. 

He had advised on October 27 of the receipt by the several 
vessels of -$40,000 (17 short) in specie; timely and pleasing to 
Mouqua and Consequa, and which " strengthens their favour- 
able opinion of your punctuality." With this solid foundation 
he made a prospective and conditional engagement for the 
John Jay, to be liquidated, one-third cash, two-thirds at 
twelve months' sight with fifteen per cent advance. 

On December 11, after " long persuasion" Snow passed the 


Bills to Mouqua and Paunkeequa at fifteen per cent discount, 
the terms prescribed from Providence being impossible. News 
had come that peace was made between France and America. 
On January 11, 1801, he had received $15,731 for the outward 
cargo, of which upwards of $300 belonged to Captain Dexter. 
On January 29 Mr. Snow had determined to take passage and 
they would sail probably in two days, with the Neptune, Oneida, 
and Barclay, having agreed for a joint convoy through the 
China seas and straits. Sunda was thought to be the most 
safe, as the " privateers from Mauritius may not know the 
Blockade of Batavia by the British has been broken up." On 
February 18 anchor was dropped at North Island, near Sunda, 
and the convoy had escaped all cruisers. 

So far the voyage had been rapid, but in the Indian Ocean 
light and baffling winds delayed ; and the slow-sailing John Jay, 
left behind by all her convoj^, did not reach St. Helena until 
June 6. An American ship at the Cape three weeks pre- 
viously had brought news purporting to give results of the 
presidential election, and this confused account was furnished 
the Jay by a British officer : 

Mr. Adams was out of office, and a Colonel named Burt as he thought, 
who had not been a very public character before, was elected in his 
stead, and the treaty entered into by our commissioners at Paris, was 
thrown out of Congress, so that it was very uncertain whether an ac- 
commodation would take place. 

After this prosperous voyage Brown and Ives entered the 
vessel at the custom-house in Providence, on July 13, 1801. 
The duties paid were $57,329.35. The charter of the ship was 
$15,624 (about her cash value), and the wages paid $6811.25. 
The voyage was some fourteen months, but the distribution of 
these cargoes required time, as will be explained in another 
connection. The accounts were finally adjusted on February 
13, 1803, when the substantial net profit of $105.862. 70 was 
apportioned to the parties in interest. 

While the John Jay was going out, Samuel Snow, consul at 
Canton, sent invoices of cargo for the Ann and Hope, which 
sailed on March 11, and gave circular information, dated July 
23, to Brown and Ives, Gibbs and Channing, and other corre- 
spondents, concerning the outlook for neutral commerce in the 
East. He had advised the Ann and Hope to go through the 


Bally or some eastern strait, avoiding Sunda by all means, lest 
she be captured. No privateers had cruised in the East for 
some months. He could not predict the course of the 
French privateers; one month they were cruising in the Bay 
of Bengal, the next west of Sunda. Many valuable captures 
had been made from the English, and one American vessel 
from Salem had been taken. Two other ships were engaged 
two days and beat off the privateers. According to news from 
Bombay, eight privateers of twenty-four guns each and two 
hundred men had sailed from France. If true, Sunda and the 
strait farther east would be much infested in August and 
September, and the best way would be around New Holland. 
This had been anticipated in the course of the John Jay. 
One American frigate cruising at Sunda" Would effectually 
protect the Chinese and Batavian trade." Probably President 
Jefferson did not agree, as he would save that expense. 

In 1798 our good ship John Jay was cruising after a Dane 
at Hamburg. Caleb Bowers wrote his brother from Providence, 
on April 4, 1798, that they were pained to learn of his sailing 
to Hamburg, as it was the opinion of every one that safe arrival 
would be next to impossible. It was more than probable that 
his brother would be taken by the French, they being " most 
or quite at Hostilities with us." Extra allowances of privi- 
lege were given to tempt crews for a Canton voyage. In 
the old West Indian commerce, where privateers and pirates 
so often prevailed, the seaman's venture brought a fascinating 
chance into almost every voyage. 

Our ship was destined to come yet closer to the belligerents 
and to get herself entangled in a most vexatious controversy, 
finally fought out in the Admiralty Court at London. This 
carries us into the Batavian trade, only inferior to that of 
Canton in the commerce of New England. If tea bewitched 
feminine gossips, coffee was coming to replace cider and alco- 
hol among men, while pepper was needed in every kitchen. 

The Jay sent to Batavia from Providence in a prelim- 
inary voyage on November 16, 1803. Mr. Ives instructed John 
F. Fry, master, to go to Batavia, following the directions of 
Daniel J. Tillinghast, supercargo. Having been there twice, 
he could assist the supercargo materially, and in addition to 
his compensation as master the firm would present him with 
$100. For a cargo of coffee and sugar sufficient capital was 


furnished, chiefly in specie and merchandise. Great despatch 
was to be made in loading at that port, and it was hoped 
eighteen or twenty days would be time enough. 

Fill the ship completely and return here, being as economical as 
possible. After ballasting with sugar, cover it with bags or bales of 
Coffee, then after spreading enough Matts, Start coffee in bulk. By 
all means attend to health ; and the small stores with vegetables will 
prevent disease. In case of disability, First Mate, Charles Stewart 
is to follow these instructions. Your terms are $45 per month with 
" privilege " of 6 tons — in coffee 1500 lbs per ton, in sugar 2240 lbs, 
in pepper 1500 lbs. Take no freight for anyone. If a load cannot be 
obtained at Batavia, go to Canton. As you sail a few hours after the 
Resource, if you arrive first, you will receive $30 bonus. 

Her outward cargo was $60,000 in specie, and about $300 
in bar iron, gin, flour, and cheese. She arrived out March 29, 
1804, sailed in April, and arrived in Providence in September. 
She entered at the custom-house without unloading, and sailed 
for Amsterdam on September 23, under John Bowers as super- 
cargo. There were thirty- three persons altogether; and the 
wages of officers and crew amounted to $548 a month. 

The Jay disposed of her Batavian cargo at Amsterdam and 
went directly to Batavia. She took a new cargo of coffee? 
sugar, and tin. Sailing for Providence on January 6, 1806, she 
was captured by the British sloop of war Driver, Robert 
Simpson, commander, and was carried into Bermuda on 
January 12. 

Brown and Ives immediately despatched Colonel Samuel 
Ward as a special agent, to assist supercargo Bowers and 
their local correspondents. Numerous letters were forwarded 
affirming their high character and standing as merchants, 
while the Providence bank and Moses Brown — the surviving 
uncle — sent out guarantees for any liabilities to be incurred 
in the proceedings at law. The "rough notes" of Mr. Ives 
show interesting details of the commerce and its attending 
risks : 

Col. Ward will go to Bermuda, to reclaim the John Jay and cargo, and 
to get documents regarding the neutrality of the property. If it be 
possible, get ship and cargo bonded to abide a final decision. Or give 
bonds for the property payable in this country, should the decision favor 
the captors. Or perhaps, the property can be purchased after trial, 
should it not be released payable in England, say in 9 months after 


purchase; the amount to be deposited in the Bank of England, or in 
the English funds for a final decision. If no such arrangement can be 
made, would it be advisable to let the ship and cargo go to England, 
there to be sold and the money invested in stocks for a final decision ? 
Evidence must be obtained to show that American vessels were per- 
mitted in time of peace to enter from Batavia as from Amsterdam. 

Mr. Ives in an affidavit presented the case of Brown and 
Ives very forcibly. In September, 1804, the John Jay was 
despatched for Amsterdam under John F. Fry with coffee, 
sugar, and pepper, the ship and cargo being wholly owned and 
consigned to D. Crommelin and Sons. They intended to fit 
the ship in Amsterdam for some port in the East Indies, 
believing it a perfectly fair destination for a neutral, and 
being firmly " persuaded of the acknowledged right of Amer- 
icans to expedite their vessels with innocent cargoes from 
Europe to the East Indies." John Bowers was supercargo, 
and sailed under instructions dated September 18, 1804. 
After a boisterous passage the ship put into Yarmouth for 
safety and was lying at the Texel in the month of November. 
She was detained until March, before arriving at Amsterdam, 
where the cargo was sold. The destination in the East Indies, 
as to the particular port, was in a measure discretionary with 
Bowers, Cape of Good Hope and Isle of France being rather 
recommended ; but the decision was left to the supercargo. 
Crommelin and Sons were requested to furnish a "capital" 
wholly on account of Brown and Ives, partly from proceeds of 
the cargo they sold. They did furnish to Bowers $83,000 in 
hard cash and about 17000 in merchandise. 

The ship sailed from Texel roads on March 20, 1804, and 
after one hundred and thirty days arrived at Batavia on July 
28. Bowers advised that produce was very scarce. On a 
second application the company agreed to furnish three thou- 
sand piculs coffee, the same number of sugar, and two thousand 
of pepper. The pepper was to be taken at Bantam ; and part 
of the sugar was loaded at Batavia, when the ship went to 
Bantam, bringing back the pepper on September 7. Bowers 
then prevailed on the company to furnish more coffee, and he 
took no pepper, advising that his cargo would be coffee, sugar, 
block tin, and some spices. The Dutch Company maintained 
a monopoly of pepper at Batavia, at prices higher than those 
prevailing in the free native ports. Ships refusing the pepper 


could not get coffee ; hence pepper was avoided in shipment 
when it was possible. 

Bowers received of Remisdyk $17,900 for obligations left at 
Batavia by Greene and Page, supercargoes of Ann and Hope, 
in June previous. Bowers had no money for expensive spices, 
and put in three hundred and twenty chests of tea instead, 
sailing on September 28. 

Instructions to Colonel Ward on March 12, 1806, ardently 
assert the justice of his cause : 

Our claim is legitimate under English instructions of 1803. How 
the voyage from Batavia to this country can be considered illegal, by 
the last or any existing instructions of the British Government, we do 
not comprehend. It is true that according to late decisions in their 
Admiralty Courts, if she had been stopped on her way to Batavia from 
the Mother Country — she would have at the time been subject to con- 
demnation — but this was a trade permitted at the time and counte- 
nanced by the English. It is believed that the high Admiralty Court 
has relaxed in some measure from the high ground taken regarding the 
Trade of Neutrals. 

It was stated that the Dutch determined to resume their 
monopoly at Batavia about 1802, but it was not done. The 
John Jay went there on a contract made in 1802, but the 
local government would not load her for the Dutch Company. 
Supercargo Bowers paid in bills of exchange for a cargo of 
sugar on Brown and Ives's sole account, which was carried to 
Providence. Colonel Ward was directed to be very cautious 
in giving bonds for the vessel and cargo. " Such is the situa- 
tion and prospect of the commerce of this country that it would 
be a very arduous task to realize the value here." 

Brown and Ives's estimate of value of property detained at 
Bermuda was as follows : 

288,538 lbs. sugar $6.50 per 112 lbs., $16,745.50 

12,500 tin cost $1800 value $2000 . . . $18,745.50 
595,349 " coffee at 1/- Bermuda currency . 89,302.35 
16,000 " Souchong tea, cost $11,250 
over 50 c. 
not worth in U. S. ex. duty . . 8,000.00 
John Jay built in 1794 iron fastened, Rapaired 
1803, no composition fastenings. Being old 
her value is less than appears .... 11,000.00 



On March 15 the owners advised Ward of the armistice 
between France and Austria, which was expected to ter- 
minate in peace. " The effect of a Continental Peace on 
the temper of England toward Neutral Nations time must 
determine." On March 17 they would not doubt but that 
" new principles are introduced into British Prize Courts, 
which make Certain Voyages illegal however innocent the 
parties when undertaking them." 

On February 26, Captain Fry had been advised how to pro- 
ceed if the vessel should be released, and an interesting ac- 
count was given of the recent loss of the Ann and Hope : 

Use every precaution. Run no risk on our coast, when making land, 
but use the Lead often. Our ship Ann & Hope on the 10th of Janu- 
ary with a W. by S. wind in a clear and starlight night kept so near 
Block Island that the ship struck. Our loss was very great. 

A glimpse of the influences a century ago is given : 

In pressing our claim, Mrs. Fry suggests you and Mr. Bowers are 
both masons and hopes upon it, altho we confess ourselves that we place 
no reliance thereon. 

In writing to supercargo Bowers at the same time they 
refer to the embarrassment caused by these severe losses 
occurring together : 

The Ann & Hope was a total wreck Jan. 10. We were hoping that 
the John Jay would arrive with a valuable cargo. Our having her 
captured heightens our distresses and misfortunes. 

They hoped that both Bowers and Captain Fry would try to 
conciliate. Ward had been informed that the captain had 
a high temper. The crew was sent home. 

On April 29 Colonel Ward advised that the ship was con- 
demned for trading directly from America to Batavia contrary 
to his Britannic Majesty's instructions of 1803. Another 
reason given was for a false destination, the ship having cleared 
for Sumatra and China, though actually bound to Batavia, with 
a quantity of bar-iron contraband at that port ; but the first 
clause was the real cause of the condemnation. On May 30 
he reported the appraisers' valuation to be £49,335.10, to 
which the defendants objected. Finally they gave bonds pay- 
able in London June 1, 1807, for .£35,096.7, to be invested in 


the funds for accumulation, and to be paid to the party finally 
recovering. The defendants abandoned all claims for expenses 
in commissions and charges. The ship and cargo were in 
perfect condition ; probably it could be insured at two or two 
and one-half per cent. A crew could be obtained in Bermuda. 
The expenses there were nearly $3000, besides commissions of 
five per cent on the sum secured. The ship cleared from 
Bermuda for Providence on June 16, 1806. 

The case was appealed to London and was seriously con- 
tested. The Judge of Vice-Admiralty Court released the 
whole property, excepting the adventures of the captain and 
crew in the cargo. It may be of interest to record the settle- 
ment with the underwriters at Boston, July 2, 1806. The 
cargo was valued here and taken by Brown and Ives. 

Sound Coffee at 26 c. short price 
Sugar at $8.50 per 112 lbs. " 
Block Tin at $2,000. 
Tea at 40 c. per lb. short price 

This valuation was to be the ground of adjustment with the 
underwriters thereafter ; whether by general average only, or 
if sentence of Court at Bermuda should be confirmed. If by 
general average, the valuation of ship, cargo, and freight was to 
contribute. If final condemnation in England should occur, 
then the underwriters should have the difference between 
actual cost of property at Bermuda and the valuation above. 
This settlement was signed by Brown and Ives, the Mas- 
sachusetts Fire and Marine Insurance Company, the New 
England Marine Insurance Company, the Union Insurance 
Company, Nathaniel P. Russell, Thomas Burley, Abraham 
Tours, each for insurers at their offices. 

The next voyage was the last ; and we may conclude with 
the John Jay, whose interesting career comprehended most of 
the vicissitudes of eastern commerce. Escaped from the clutch 
of British Admiralty law, she surrendered to the Neptune, 
leaving her bones on some ledges and sands near the port of 

The ship was chartered three-quarters to Brown and Ives 
and one-quarter to Taylor and Talbot. Brown and Ives's in- 
structions on October 13, 1806, were to Captain John F. Fry, 
who would have the collateral aid of Captain Gustavus Taylor 


residing at Batavia. He had likewise an " Assistant," Ben- 
jamin D. Jones, who was to receive for assistance sixty days 
after return of vessel $250, and a privilege of one ton for the 
voyage around the world, and " no other compensation." She 
carried $17,131.63 in merchandise and $50,000 in specie, and 
was to try for a cargo of coffee. The government controlled 
all the products of Java and the Dutch East Indies; and late 
regulations made every vessel take a certain proportion of 
pepper, — high at Batavia. 

Avoid it if possible, as we prefer coffee though the price be high, and 
hope for § to £ of a cargo. For deficiency in funds draw on us at 6 
months sight or more, $50,000, having had extensive concerns at 
Batavia. We expect the prices hitherto prevailing for coffee and 
sugar, viz, $18 and $5 to $6 per picol. If prices advance and these 
are not to be had ascertain if a cargo of pepper can be obtained at 6 
cents per lb. at native ports on the coast of Sumatra, taking other 
articles like coffee, tin, etc. The funds are not adequate, or we would 
mention Calcutta and Canton for alternatives. As appears now, a 
pepper voyage is the only alternative, but if circumstances oblige you 
to a different opinion, we confide the destination of the ship to you. 
If as we do not expect, you go to a Dutch, French, or Spanish port, 
make no trade whatever at Batavia. Let nothing be sold or bought, as 
it is not known how the English Letters of Admiralty will consider 
such a trade between their enemies at ports in the East Indies. Avoid 
all offence to either of the European Belligerent Powers. In any case, 
return here direct, stopping for distress only ; if from Batavia, we should 
expect you in about 9 months. As you have made several voyages 
there and know the customs, we do not particularize. By the last 
news from England, peace is not probable. Several articles for pres- 
ents are sent — bad custom but you must comply and apply in the 
most judicious manner. If a pepper voyage be undertaken, you may 
find an expert in the trade and in the Malay language, to go for a 
small compensation. If incapacitated yourself Uriel Rea mate with 
B. D. Jones assistant will take charge. Your compensation for every 
part of the duty will be $50 per month wages and a privilege of 6 tons, 
estimated at 2240 lbs sugar, and 2000 lbs for coffee, with other articles 
as customary. Guard the quantities taken on privilege, and take no 
freight for anyone. 

The Jay carried twenty-nine persons beside the assistant. 
Twenty-one were born in Rhode Island and Massachusetts, 
two in New York, two in Pennsylvania, two in Holland, one 


(yellow) in Mexico, one (the cook) in Africa. All were sub- 
jects of the United States, excepting one from Africa and 
one from Holland. Wages were similar to those recorded in 
previous voyages. There was a carpenter, but no boatswain 
nor armorer. 

Her outward cargo included crockery, $1748.77, dry-goods 
(chiefly " Brittagnes ") 19295.37, gin 15307.12, flour $305, 
and sundries (including three cows $105) $624.63, making in 
total $17,280.89. It may be remarked that the appetites for 
" bread and sack " were proportioned much like those ascribed 
to Falstaff, some four centuries earlier. 

Captain Fry arrived out on February 25, and advised on 
March 4 that he had obtained permission to sell cargo, free of 
obligation to purchase. He could get a cargo soon if allowed to 
go to " an out port," but his instructions forbade. On March 
14 the market was glutted with all kinds of goods, and dollars 
would have the preference for about two years. There were in 
port thirteen American vessels mostly waiting for cargo. On 
Ma} T 18 he was offered over $50,000, at six months' sight on 
twenty-five per cent advance, which he would probably accept. 
On July 19, after much trouble, he had obtained a proper pro- 
portion of sugar and coffee for loading his vessel in due bal- 
last. He had been prohibited loading at u an out port," and 
sickness on board had increased expense. Scarcely an officer 
or man had been free from illness. He advised insurance on 
cargo for $125,000 to $130,000. 

Gustavus Taylor's sales of the outward cargo amounted to 
$4211.25, chiefly for gin and crockery, the dry-goods being 
sent back. The return cargo shipped on August 13, 1807, was 
" Britagnes and Estopillas," $7988.43 ; coffee, 9299 bags at $18 
and $20 per picul, $117,458, and 65 bags, $779; pepper, 827 
bags 429 picul at 11J, $4933,50 ; total, $131,158.93. 

On August 17, 1807, the, ship struck a rock and was 
stranded on Dampier or " Pidgeon's Island " near Batavia. 
Captain Gustavus Taylor, advising on September 6, said the 
disaster was owing to a strong current and a high tide that 
" almost completely covered the land " and left hardly any- 
thing above water but shrubs six feet high. Captain Taylor 
virtually took charge, carried the wrecked property into 
Batavia by lighters, and obtained therefor $4906.20. 

A most interesting voyage was made by the ship Arthur, 


Solomon Townsend, master, sailing September 26, 1807, and 
reaching home June 3, 1809. Brown and Ives's instructions 
to the master and George W. Page, supercargo, are given, for 
the actual result varied exceedingly from the plan projected. 
The captain was directed to proceed without delay to Monte- 
video, then with proceeds of all or a part of the cargo to go 
to Canton as speedily as possible. 

It is hoped you may arrive at Canton in April next. Mr. Geo. W. 
Page embarks with you ; to him we have consigned the cargo ; we 
hereby request you to conform to his wishes and to consider him in 
our stead. 

We expect you will go in ballast from Montevideo ; you must have 
her in good time, as well as in good order. Probably you will en- 
counter the contrary monsoon in going, and in returning from Canton. 
The ship being in fine order and a superior sailer, the officers well ap- 
pointed ; we shall have little apprehension. The route in both directions, 
we submit to your judgment, but the Arthur's last voyage having been 
by the Eastern Straits, we rather incline to recommend that. Hope 
you may return in 12 or 13 months. Your terms are $45 per month 
with privilege of six tons under deck. In case of disaster (which God 
forbid) Wilber Kelly will succeed and follow these orders. Recommend 
to the protection of Divine Providence. 

To Mr. Page, the supercargo, were given bills of lading 
for merchandise and specie. At Montevideo he was to take 
proceeds in money, unless articles were found adapted to 
the Canton market. The brig Eliza had taken to Montevideo 
two protested bills drawn at Sydney, New Holland. If the 
brig had abandoned the voyage there, Page was to get the 
bills and go by Sydney to collect them. At Montevideo he 
might draw not exceeding .£4500 at sight four months, or 
longer, payable in America or London. If the cargo should 
not be in demand at Montevideo, the vessel was to go to Cape 
of Good Hope, Isle of France, or New Holland. If the ship 
Projector of New York should be met, having $20,000 specie 
belonging to Brown and Ives, Page was to take the money to 
Canton, to be applied to account. Arrival at Canton was ex- 
pected in March or April, when Page was to consign to Con- 
sequa or Houqua, Hong merchants. If amounts due them had 
not been paid, Page was to provide them out of the Arthur's 
cargo. If reasonable freight could be had, it should be pre- 
ferred to purchase, Brown and Ives's funds being invested 


wholly in nankins to be stowed in the ship. If obliged to 
buy, he was to take old teas or wait for new in his judgment, 
according to time of arrival and other circumstances. 

Memorandum of cargo for return was given, though freight 
was preferred, which must be American or other neutral prop- 
erty. The previous year, freight had been at $70 a ton, which 
was far better than buying teas. He was to recollect that he 
was restricted from any port controlled by France or other 
enemies of England, by an order of the British Council. There 
was no expectation of calling at such ports, but this was for 
his " government." Certificates of landing must be attended 
to and blanks filled. Page's compensation was arranged in a 
special agreement. William Carter went as assistant and was 
to succeed him, if disabled. He was to remind Captain Town- 
send, " if necessary, that strict economy is indispensable." If 
a cargo should be purchased in return, it must not exceed 
$70,000. A small cargo was taken, — liquors, provisions, and 
8500 pieces of nankin. 

The Arthur arrived at Rio Janeiro after a poor passage on 
December 13, — the first American vessel to touch at that 
port. On November 27 she had spoken a brig and learned 
that the Spanish had retaken Montevideo and excluded Amer- 
ican vessels. Two American ships were not allowed to sell 
slaves. The British troops had been transferred mostly to the 
Cape. Page tried in vain to sell his nankins to merchants for 
smuggling into Rio, owing to the extreme vigilance of a new 

At Cape Town on January 30, 1808, he wrote more freely, 
for the first report went by England. The Spaniards at river 
La Plata suspected Americans, because of aid given England 
during the war, Moreover the English injured " their coasting 
trade by deceptions " on both coasts of South America. " Af- 
ter maturely weighing all," it was decided to sail for the 
Cape, " risking sale " of nankins and Catalonia wine. It was 
hoped the transfer of three thousand troops from the Monte- 
video garrison would afford a good market for provisions. 

We now get an inkling of British colonial . " graft " in the 
good old times. Lord Caledon permitted the landing of pro- 
visions and linseed oil, refusing spirits by reason of " the in- 
fluence of some large dealers." It was hoped that a special 
permit would be given for the sale of three hundred cases of 


gin at $7 Spanish, free of duty. Nankins could not be sold. 
On February 5 the governor would not allow transshipment 
of gin u to the astonishment of all." He enclosed a list of lum- 
ber for ships going east, as it always sold well at the Cape. 

After a pleasant passage Mr. Page arrived, on March 5, at 
the Isle of France, or Mauritius, and reported on the 30th. A 
fine prospective market was chilled by the sudden arrival of 
vessels from Baltimore and New York, so that an auction 
would not move goods. Flour dropped from $20 to $15. Gin 
sold at $4.75, and nankins at fifty-nine cents. All sales were 
on a credit of three to six months, discount being three-quarters 
of one per cent, which had been allowed on above prices. 
They were still subject to duties and commissions. On April 
14 he got rid of his butter at thirty-seven and a half cents, 
and the last of the wandering nankins at forty-nine cents 
(about the low medium price in China). The export of dol- 
lars being prohibited, he was forced to buy for Canton two 
hundred bales cotton, about seventeen tons of ebony, and some 

He enclosed a long list of articles for the Isle of France, 
not recommending the dry-goods, though they sold at times 
" immensely high." Necessary articles were better in all the 
colonies than " those of luxury." On April 23 the market 
was unchanged, with many English vessels, captured by the 
French, bringing in valuable cargoes. At the moment there 
was good prospect for an assorted cargo. There was no chance 
for neutrals to buy goods, as the local capitalists, having no 
other business, would compete at small profits. Captain 
Townsend reported a heavy outlay for repairs on the ship at 
the Cape. 

On April 30 Mr. Page hoped to be off, " as embargoes 
more frequently take place here than in any other part of the 
world." Some of the sandalwood was divided among the 
ventures on board. It cost on board $11 a thousand French 
pounds. It answered for ballast, and he hoped Brown and 
Ives's share would pay three hundred per cent profit. The 
last vessel brought news of the intended embargo. " I hope 
all the good expected from it may take place, but I am fearful 
of war." 

The fluctuations of the market at Isle of France were 
almost incredible. Mr. Page gave the very questionable 


advice that agents should not bring newspapers conveying 
commercial intelligence, as the Governor would demand them 
immediately through the boarding officer. 

Captain Townsend sailed on May 3, 1808, and arrived at 
Whampoa in midsummer. He stripped his ship, stored the 
rigging below, and covered her outside with awnings and mats 
to the water's edge. Many people were sick during the hot 
season, and they were never on duty all at once. In October 
he found " the bends rotten," and put her in order. After 
consultation with the captains and carpenters of American 
ships, he sheathed her with three-quarters inch boards, " from 
fore port of fore chains to after port of mizen chains," thus 
making her perfectly tight. 

Mr. Page reported from Canton, on July 5, 1808, that there 
was a large stock of old teas culled, mostly bad ; that war 
between England and America was deprecated by the Chinese, 
who valued the American trade ; and that it would be better 
to remain over the season for new teas. By that time affairs 
with England would be decided ; if peacefully, then freight 
might be had from other shippers. The ship was secured with 

On January 10, 1809, Mr. Page reported that the season's 
work was well under way. Houqua had $20,000 of Brown 
and Ives's funds on interest from July 17 to December 20. 
Money, received for sale of goods since, was not allowed in- 
terest, as the merchant had no use for it. The Arthur had 
engaged two hundred tons of freight at $60 and thirty tons at 
$55. Twenty thousand pieces of nankin were bought at 836 
to |40 a hundred, a very low price. A note due for camlets 
sold could only be collected in six thousand pieces of " Com- 
pany " nankin at $85, with remainder in " short yellows " at 
$10 to $45. Liquors were sold at ninety cents a gallon, com- 
ing out about $1500 " short of expectations." 

The following: incident of this uncertain commerce involv- 
ing the two hemispheres is shown in Mr. Page's account of the 
loss of brig Eliza, reported at Canton through the ship Jenny 
Dorr. The brig sailed from Port Jackson in Australia to the 
"Feejee or Friendly" Islands for sandalwood. She ran upon a 
reef, and Captain Corey saved about $8000 from her $40,000 
in specie. Corey disagreed with the captain of the Jenny 
Dorr concerning price of passage, when the Dorr put in at 



Guam for masts, etc. There was a small settlement with 
garrison. The Spanish governor was informed that Corey 
piloted the English up the river La Plata, and arrested and 
detained him with his money. Unfortunately Corey's certifi- 
cate, showing impressment by the English for the pilotage, 
was lost with the brig. Some sort of document must be 
obtained to get Corey out of limbo. 

On February 10, 1809, the ship was about ready to sail. 
Houqua asked forty-eight taels for hyson and forty-two taels 
for young hyson at seven months. The supercargo refused, 
and following instructions closely filled with freight except- 
ing the nankins and small ventures. 

The Arthur made a fine passage through the strait of 
Sunda and entered her cargo in the custom-house at Provi- 
dence on June 5, 1809, as follows : 

69,000 pieces nankins 36 c to 42 c . . . . $29,640, duty 15% 

6,000 " " 85 c duty 15% . . . 5,100 
1,575 pkgs Cassia free 1400 pieces Nankins 

58 duty 15% 1,682 

Small ventures of all sorts, duty 15 to 17£ . 10,098.46 

The total amount of entry was .... 846,520.46 
The vessel earned her freight money in addition. 

We should endeavor to picture to ourselves the market of 
Canton and the unfolding of the old world, when our adven- 
turers left the narrow Narragansett waters, sought the Cape of 
Good Hope, 1 made a voyage half around the world, and then 
found themselves in India or China. At Pondicherry the 
first explorers and traders going by the General Washington 
were met by the natives, as already described. In the 
spring of 1797 Mr. Bowers sailed from Whampoa — where 
vessels must anchor — to the inner port of Canton. There the 
boats in the suburbs were beautifully illuminated, and families 
lived on them constantly, as they do to-day. The Americans 
passed five "chop houses" that the "honorable gentlemen" 
stationed there might inspect trunks, examine articles, and ex- 
tort money from the visitors. When our party left in the 
autumn, the process was the same. Petty mandarins were in 

1 Few vessels ever went by Cape Horn. Captain Dexter said of this route 
on May 26, 1804, " The Distance is about the same. Many opinions are in 
favor of it, but none have yet attempted it." 


a "go-down" to inspect trunks and other matters. They de- 
manded the regular fee of 116 again and again. Finally, the 
•visitors paid $1 "countersign" at each of the chop houses to 
escape further inspection. The whole atmosphere was filled 
with " cumshaw " fees and " squeezes." 

Sometimes the merchants and shippers owned, but generally 
they hired, a factory or warehouse. These places of business 
had been established by Europeans more than two hundred 
years before. A French factory was rented this season by 
two American ships at $1000. Bowers and Olney for the 
John Jay hired the front factory of the Imperial Hong for 
$1000. In 1803 T. Thompson for the Isis occupied factory 
No. 4 in company with his brother, paying $320 for his share. 
He contracted for the next factory at $1400 a year, intending 
to underlet. 

A factory was half an inn as well as a store. Four respec- 
table gentlemen — driven from Manila by the war — resided 
at Captain Coffin's factory. In the morning as Bowers stepped 
out of his lodging, he was surrounded by Chinese tailors, shoe- 
makers, barbers, etc. He engaged the linguist Chequa, a 
potent official, as the following incident shows. Captain Dean 
had bought $25,000 worth of silks from Youqua, who had been 
"purser" to Ponqua, but being a Hong merchant competed 
with his former employer. Ponqua was consignee for Dean, 
and now " colleagued " with the head linguist Geouqua to pre- 
yent the delivery of Dean's goods. A large sum was extorted 
from Youqua to bring about the shipment, much to Dean's 
annoyance. Geouqua was the only linguist having access to 
the Grand Hoppo, which accounted " for his unbounded share 
of impudence. He is a Great rouge." 

The Hong was an association of about a dozen Chinese 
merchants, controlling all trade with aliens and responsible for 
their customs dues. The Hong consignee who " secured " a 
ship received two per cent on all purchases, and the purchaser 
was allowed the same for breakage of china. This monopoly 
lasted until 1842. The Grand Hoppo was an autocrat in this 
circle. Custom was law in China, and it was customary for 
the tyrant to " squeeze " these merchants hard, when they first 
began business. If he wanted $100,000 the Hong must pay it. 
The then incumbent was Tyagan, and all his expenses were 
paid by the " Cohong," however large the demands. When 


Consequa's chop was suspended, the Hoppo squeezed him for 
830,000. He was enormously rich in lands, and the East India 
Company owed him half a million; yet, as always in China, it 
was difficult for a wealthy man to raise cash. He met the 
squeeze and made good his contracts at great sacrifice. Sam- 
qua was a well-known silk merchant, who had handled a 
million and a half pieces of nankin the previous year. He 
kept out of the Hong to avoid squeezes, his business being 
conducted by his purser in Geouqua's Hong. " This was not 
the rouge, but Geouqua, the upright and venerable Hong 

Observations of India, recorded in the General Washington's 
log, 1787, were of similar import. " One must employ an 
Indian called a debauch [a broker]. Watch him close, for the 
whole life and study of the Indian is to cheat you." He ac- 
complished this not openly, but by " combining with the Buyer, 
and an Innumerable number of other methods." One must 
agree in advance for the " hire " fixed by the police. Appar- 
ently the commercial climate was not influenced by race or 
color, in the opinion of our diarist. " As Europeans mostly go 
to India for a fortune, it may not be thought uncharitable to 
Regard them in the same light." 

The Grand Hoppo's deputy measured the ship with great 
" Pomp and Parade." His cumshaw to the John Jay con- 
sisted of two bullocks, eight sacks of flour, and four pots of ■ ' Sam 
Soo," a spirituous liquor. The Americans returned a gift of 
1950 taels, — a " vast difference," but this was the rate for a 
foreign vessel of any size. 

In weights and measures one hundred catties were equivalent 
to one picul, or 133| English pounds; in cloth or long measure 
ten "poontas " to one covid, and two covids to thirty-six inches 
English. Accounts were kept in tael, mace, candareens, 
and cash, all except the cash being figurative or imaginary. 
Ten cash were equivalent to one candareen, ten candareens to 
one mace, ten mace to one tael, which equals $1.38ff Spanish. 

There were some arbitrary customs in currency as applied 
to prices. For example, in paying compradors and others for 
service along the shore, the rate was seventy-five candareens 
for the Spanish dollar. A comprador, or steward, was en- 
gaged to supply the ship with provisions when in port ; there 
were likewise house compradors. When the Arthur lay at 


Whampoa, in 1802, the latter's expenditure for factory at Can- 
ton was $425.50, and the ship's bill for similar service was 
$301.33. The wages at the factory and the cumshaw to ser- 
vants and coolies was $11. A cumshaw of $18 was paid 
Houqua's coolies for packing, the pilot had $60 including a 
gift, and a linguist received $476. Everywhere the cumshaw 
prevailed at all seasons. When Mr. Bowers took leave at the 
factory, the passages were crowded with coolies, mandarins, 
soldiers, and regular servants, — all " most Impudent fellows 
for cumshaw." 

The Chinese merchants were fairly upright ; some individu- 
als were honest and honorable, without qualification. They 
treated each other no better than they did foreigners, or the 
latter would have been worse off than they were. If they 
would have trusted each other to combine, then aliens would 
have been at their mercy. Although they tried this often and 
most " seriously," they could not hold together for two months. 
Such was the testimony of Consul Snow, long resident at 
Canton, and thoroughly acquainted with the Hong. 

A curious sidelight on the character of men and the customs 
of the time appears in the account of Mr. Page, February 9, 
1809. On account of uncertain prospect of war or peace, 
Houqua had urged the anticipation of Brown and Ives's note, 
which would have prevented an intended payment to Conse- 
qua. Having to trade with Houqua, Page agreed to pay a 
part to each, and offered Consequa $14,000. He agreed to re- 
ceive " old dollars " at current rate, to be endorsed on the 
note. Houqua had previously wished for a draft on him in 
favor of Consequa, but a subsequent difference arose. Houqua 
having another demand on Consequa for new dollars, the latter 
demanded of Page a premium after promising to take the old 
dollars. Consequa refused settlement, and Page left a certifi- 
cate of the facts, for future agents of Brown and Ives. Yet 
Consequa paid his squeezes and Hong contracts at great 

On November 9, 1804, T. Thompson reported dollars high 
at Lisbon, — where Brown and Ives had sometimes sent ships 
for them, — likewise they were dear in America. But he 
could advise no equivalent at Canton except cotton "if at 13 
or 14 cents." Money and cotton have hardly changed in a 
century, though sterling bills have replaced bullion. Ex- 


change on London was then generally at twelve to fifteen per 
cent discount. At times heavy purchases made by the East 
India Company depreciated their bills twenty to twenty-five 
per cent. 

The oriental, like all great commerce, was built up on a wide 
basis of credit. The Hong merchants, though wealthy, 
were generally short of active capital. Teas, nankins, and 
sugar were sold on credit ; china, silks, and small articles in 
general required cash. The large merchants were so involved 
they could not furnish a cargo, unless they received about two- 
thirds of the amount in cash. The remainder was chiefly profit 
probably, and they would risk their portion of the shipment to 

The new crop of teas came in October, and the largest busi- 
ness was done in the late autumn. Correspondents were con- 
tinually sending price-lists and memoranda both of European 
and American vessels. On November 9, 1804, T. Thompson, 
resident, advised that twenty-three American ships were at. 
Whampoa. Five would go directly to Europe or touch at 
home for orders, carrying black teas chiefly. Those going 
home, particularly u to the southward," would carry green, 
especially hyson skins and young hyson. Prices were then 
Campoi black 28 tael, Congo black 26/27, souchong 36/40, hyson 
skin 26 tael, young hyson 36/40, hyson 55/56, gunpowder 72 tael. 
These figures varied little from those reported in July. Nan- 
kins had risen to 852 apiece and had fallen to $50.50, about a 
medium price. Silks were so high that few were going to Amer- 
ica. He had contracted with Houqua for one hundred thou- 
sand pieces of nankin, half of first chop at $49, half of second 
chop at $4 off. He had paid 120,000 in cash and agreed for 
the remainder on November 1, interest to be added thereafter 
at one per cent a month. He regarded the contract as favorable, 
but could have done rather better for all cash. 

When the John Jay was being filled in October, 1800, 
Snow found it difficult to carry out the transaction at fifteen 
per cent, as Brown and Ives's limit was twelve per cent, fear- 
ing Mouqua " might fly from forty-five Tale." Hyson rose 
to fifty-five taels. Good bargains were often made in the 
winter after the early ships had sailed ; but sometimes, when 
Mr. Ives timed a ship accordingly, the East India Company 
swept off the surplus goods. They were the greatest, and 


almost a controlling, factor in the market. In 1802, buying 
largely of broadcloths and cassimeres, they flooded the Hong 
with their bills on London. 

The greatest disturbances in working the market were 
caused by the European wars. For example, in 1808, the 
British attempted to take from the Chinese, in favor of Portu- 
gal, Macao on the Canton river, which was before the days 
of Hong Kong, the greatest entrepot in the China seas. Thir- 
teen ships of the East India Company and thirty others from 
England were detained there, mostly with cargoes. " Chops" 
for the ships of all nations were stopped from October 25 to 
28. Servants were taken from the factories, as well as com- 
pradors, for supplying the ships. The pressure at last in- 
duced the British administration to withdraw from " an 
enterprize fraught with ruin to all British subjects." As Mr. 
Page advised on July 5, between the orders of the British 
Council and those of the French Emperor, there was little 
chance for the trade of neutrals. 

Many return cargoes were projected by Mr. Ives, and one 
may be cited in contrast with the shipment returned to show 
the actual trade of the time. Ship Isis of three hundred and 
fifteen tons — one of the smaller vessels — was instructed in 
his own hand at Providence, October 28, 1803, to procure the 
following merchandise: 

250 chests Hyson tea, 200 ch. Young Hyson, 100 ch. Imperial Gun- 
powder mostly in halves and catty boxes, 500 ch. 200 do small 
Souchong, fresh and well flavored, not high priced, 800 ch. Campoi 
(black) 100 Singlo, 100 Picco 100 Tonkay, 300 ch. Congo (black) 500 
ch. Hyson skin, of which 150 ch. are to be packed in 10 catty boxes, 
100 ch. Bohea. Of soft white sugar 30 to 40 tons, in \ pickol bags for 
ballast, 20 boxes fine white do. Of yellow Nankins 50m to 100m 
pieces, in bales 10. 4 and 2 rolls each, matted for storage. In yellow 
Company do 1000 or 2000 pieces white of short length. Of deep bine 
4000 ps. 11 yards and undressed, surely not dressed. Of black fine 
5| yds. 200 pieces. Of deep blue 5^ yards 2000 pieces. 20 boxes 
rhubarb. Floor mats and cheap fans taking no room. Few tons 
Tutenage for ballast. About $8000 in black silks to be f Lutestring 
1 Satin. China or Galligo root if low, no room stowed among the 
teas. Any other articles Mr. Thompson (resident) thinks may promise 
handsome profit. 

On June 10, 1804, Thompson made the actual returns : 


253 chests Hyson at 68 tale, 73 ch and 50 ten catty pkgs Gun- 
powder at 68 tale, 185 ch Young Hyson at 34 tale, 318 ch and 210 
twenty five catty pkgs Souchong at 35 tale, 200 ch Twankay at 24 tale, 
475 ch Hyson Skin at 24 tale, 338 ch Campoi at 27 tale, 232 ch 
Congo at 20 to 21 tale, 120 ch Pakoa at 58 tale, 150 ch Bohea at 10 
T 5 M per Pickul, 150 ch Chulan at $9 say about $65,000 for teas. 

100,000 pieces Nankins $44 to $48. 10,000 pieces Company do 
at $95. 4000 pieces Blue at $115. 2000 pieces White at $57. 300 
pieces Lutestring silk at $12 J 200 pieces Synchans do at $17. 150 
pieces 18 and 30 yd. Satin at $19|. In all about $9225 for black 
silks. 20 boxes Rhubarb at 32 tale, 32 pickul Cassia at $22. 200 
pickul Teutinay at 7T 7M, 50 pickul China Root at 7 tale, 300 pickul 
sugar at 5T 7M. The sundry articles cost about $77,000, making with 
the measurement of the ship (paid to Grand Hoppo) $80,000 paid out 
in specie. The teas were on a credit of 20 months. 

Ginseng was a favorite import from America, though fluctu- 
ating greatly in price. India cotton then brought one tael, 
or $1.38 f|, for fourteen pounds; American brought two 
taels more. Glass tumblers were frequently and profitably sent 
east, and in one instance three gold watches and one silver 
watcb are noted in the exports. 

Silks were always an important factor ; and the following 
list given Brown and Ives on May 10, 1800, by J. Moses and 
Son indicated the wants of the New York market: 

Stripe Lutstring — green stripe Cheapest. Black stripe do extremely 
saleable for vests, at about half the price of English. Baglipores very 
slight goods always sell well here at about $10 per piece. Colored 
Lutstrings are good when selected according to our patterns. Colored 
Siushaws — 30 yds at $17.50 are lower than Lutstrings and answer 
better for country trade. Black satins are always sure ; in quantities 
say double of the 3rd to the second and double of the 2nd to the 
first quality. Black Lutstrings are always good by the case. Black 
Taffetas are always bad, costing too high. 

Into the cosmopolitan community at Canton our western 
adventurers went, much as we go to Paris to-day. The civil- 
ized world was just then changing literal manufacture into the 
work of steam-driven machinery. The teeming East amply 
furnished work of the hand, applied with a grace and elegance 
that the West could hardly attain. Art might be limited in 
scope, but its subtle influence more or less pervaded the arti- 


ficial products of the busy and industrious East. " Old Spoilum 
Painter " might not rival the art of Greece or Italy, but his 
" Triumph of Liberty " on glass at $20 was a good influence 
in our prosaic and stolid America. Fooqua, another artist, sent 
two " Views of Somerset " on glass with gilt frames at $5 each ; 
two landscapes on " Canvass gilt " at $8.50 each ; and four 
u storms " at the same price. The greatest of the pictures was 
" Charity on glass " at $6 ; and there was the " resurrection of 
a Pious Mother." The sound of Chinese names as rendered in 
English only deceives us, for we have "Young Spilum" setting 
forth twelve monthly seasons on glass for $50. Portraits on 
glass of General Washington were a favorite subject. China 
Street gave place for these articles of luxury. Houqua the 
lacquer merchant had beautiful wares, some of which could be 
" ciphered." A lot including dressing-case and decanter 
stands cost $38.50. Great quantities of cheap fans in variety 
were stowed in the chinks of all vessels. Roy Yeng, a silver- 
smith on China Street, made 4i cyphered " gold sleeve buttons 
for Mr. Bowers at $4.50 ; and he obtained his miniature at 
$10. He carried for Thomas Young a box of painter's colors, 
brushes, etc., at $8. Mrs. Abigail Jenckes was gratified by a 
pair of "silver Temple Bowed spectacles in a Tortoise Shell 
case " at $5. Fishing rods, canes, and umbrellas were com- 
mon in the exports. Bowers purchased for Zachariah Allen a 
small invoice of chinaware and silks for $150.12. There were 
beautiful pieces of china, one fine set in landscape, fifteen cups 
and saucers, one coffee pot, cover and stand, one slop bowl, 
sugar pot, milk ewer and stand, and four plates, all for $13. 
Three hundred pieces, tea cups and saucers, for $18 ; these 
were special articles and prices from S}^nshong. Fouchong 
furnished twenty-five china punch bowls, one gallon, at $18. 
There was a ciphered seal at $1, and two dozen pearl coat 

For his immediate personal wants Mr. Bowers was accom- 
modated by the servants and artisans, who crowded into the 
factory on his arrival. Akin, a launder, washed out 427 pieces 
for $5.69. "Six Finger" made leather or nankin shoes at 
fifty cents a pair, and satin shoes for men or women at $1. 
The tailor got $11 for a blue or black cloth coat, and $5 for 
pantaloons. Jackets were $1.50 ; under-lambkin vests or nan- 
kin breeches, eighty cents each ; shirts, $1, and a winter gown, 



$3. His servant Assam, brother of the comprador, received 
$5 a month. 

Before leaving the aesthetic opportunities of China Street, it 
is worth while to notice the work of Mervia, who painted on 
canvas views of the factories at Canton or Whampoa at $6.75. 
There were figures at $3.50, and Mr. Bowers took one dozen 
small paintings at $2 each, illustrating the manufacture of tea. 

A subordinate and auxiliary commerce was conducted with 
Europe to furnish goods for the oriental trade. An enforced 
voyage of the John Jay in 1798 to St. Petersburg has been 
noted, whence she took home a customary cargo. But smaller 
vessels, sometimes schooners, were despatched constantly, 
loaded generally with provisions, lumber, etc., for the south of 
Europe. Disposing of their cargoes there, they went on to 
St. Petersburg for a return. 

The ship Arthur was sent on June 8, 1804, laden with beef 
and flour consigned to John Bulkeley and Son, Lisbon. Martin 
Page was master and his own supercargo. Mr. Ives instructed 
him that as the season was late he did not think of another 
market, but Captain Page could go to another southern port, 
if desirable. He hoped for not more than ten or twelve days' 
delay at Lisbon. Exchanges were doubtful, but he asked the 
agents to furnish X4300 or £4500 on account of the cargo. 
He hoped there would be only three weeks' delay at St. 
Petersburg, and urged economy. In case of disability, John 
Chatty, mate, was to succeed as master. Captain Page's com- 
pensation was to be 145 per month, with $ 10 " harbor-pay " at 
Lisbon, also $50 for services at St. Petersburg, where he 
was to oversee the purchases made by the agents. He was 
given a privilege of seven tons under deck, and was to receive 
4 ' no other allowance whatever." 

The Arthur arrived at Lisbon in twenty-six days from 
Providence, and her cargo was landed for sale. Mr. Ives 
wrote Bulkeley that Spanish dollars were "extremely difficult 
to collect " in America, and asked the prospect for obtaining 
them in Lisbon. Bulkeley replied, on July 5, that at a few 
weeks' notice they could get at any time $100,000, September 
to December being the best season. The price long ruled at 
830 to 835 reals. Spain having much rain and bad roads the 
previous winter, the price advanced to 865 or 870 reals. They 
furnished dollars for Captain Page to be used at St. Peters- 


burg. This was necessary, as heavy purchases of hemp there 
by the British government had lowered the rate of exchange 
on London. The project for buying dollars at Lisbon did not 
result in much business. 

Captain Page secured a return cargo at St. Petersburg on 
August 29 : 

3052 bars common new sable iron, 101 bundles clean hemp, 400 
pieces sail cloth, 250 pieces Flemish 250 do Raven duck, 1 bale diaper, 
1 do huckabock, 4 cables cordage, 467 poods anchors, 12 pieces sail 
cloth, and 10 pieces Russian duck for ship's use. 

Captain Page's own venture under the privilege was : 

3 bdles hemp, 100 pieces sail duck, 100 pieces Raven duck, 20 pieces 
sheeting, 2 beds, 2 looking glasses, 1 bale of 11 dozen table cloths. 

The entry of the cargo on December 3, 1804, at the custom- 
house in Providence was $24,851.40. The duties were fifteen 
per cent, excepting one item at seventeen and one-half and 
another at twenty-two and one-half. 

A voyage of the schooner Nancy on May 26, 1802, to the 
West Indies reveals some curious incidents in the commerce of 
the time. Chartered by Brown and Ives of James Rhodes and 
Company, of fifty-four tons' burden, she was despatched to 
Guadalupe under Nathaniel Pearce, master. The particular 
object was to find and recover for them the ship Charlotte and 
the cargo. The Charlotte, Samuel Morgan master, under 
direction of George J. Tyler, sailed from Providence in October 
for Bilboa, carrying chiefly hides and bar-copper belonging to 
Mr. Clark. These were landed, and the freight was paid ; a 
part, fifty thousand livres, was in bills drawn on Paris, and 
was intended for remittance to London. Besides there were 
$12,000 in nankins and teas, which if not sold at Bilboa were 
to be consigned to Stobel and Martini, Bordeaux. Having 
spent two weeks at Bilboa, Tyler went to Bordeaux and con- 
signed the nankins and teas. Instead of returning thence, 
with articles ordered there for Providence, Stobel and Martini 
advised on April 3, that he was sailing for the West Indies 
with a cargo of $8000 or $10,000 on account of Brown and 
Ives, furnished by Stobel and Martini on the strength of goods 
in their hands. " What articles or where he is bound we know 
not, for he has not condescended to write. Probably he will 


call at Guadaloupe and finally go to Cape Francis." They 
had despatched and given "P/A" to Captain Samuel Young to 
recover. They did not wish to supersede Young, but directed 
Captain Pearce to assist. Pearce could keep the Charlotte or 
Nancy, sending one home without lading, though the schooner 
would be cheaper for service among the islands. " Whichever 
you think best, keep under your own controui." The schooner 
carried a valuable cargo, on which Captain Pearce was to re- 
ceive five per cent for sales and two and one-half for return 
purchases. On bills of exchange or specie, he was not to 
receive commission. In return for cargo, specie was to be 
preferred and exchange next. Certificates were to be obtained, 
if he procured articles entitled to drawback. " Be moderate 
and persuade Tyler 'tis not only duty but immediate interest 
to give immediate possession." " Urge his return in one of 
the vessels, for it will be some satisfaction to see him once 
more and hear in what manner he got rid of our property in 
Europe." For recovering from Tyler, Pearce was to be com-, 
pensated on his return. He was to receive $12 a month in 
fixed wages. The schooner was to be put in good order and 
kept so by the owners, Brown and Ives paying $100 a month 
for the charter. She was chartered again in September at $90 
a month. If lost, the owners were to receive $1400. 

Her portage bill in addition to the captain, as noted, carried 
the mate at $20, one sailor at $12 with privilege of four barrels, 
one seaman at $15, privilege of two barrels, a boy and a raw 
hand at $6 each. Her cargo took $882.50 in flour, $100 in 
menhaden, $114 in codfish, $362.01 in tallow candles, $850 in 
Russia sheeting, $14.50 in silk handkerchiefs, $997.50 in thirty 
pieces of colored Sinchaws, $831.25 in hair ribbons, $3066 in 
nankins, $1265.78 in china, $540.10 in hyson and hyson skin tea, 
$41 in staves and shooks (the old seventeenth century export), 
making a total of $10,500.84. 

Captain Pearce sent her home, on July 12, under Sylvester 
Rhodes, master, carrying only seven hogsheads of St. Croix 
rum, two bales of cotton, eight barrels of sugar, six boxes of 
claret, four boxes of fruit and preserves, eighty-six barrels 
and three bags of salt, and, best of all, $6200 in specie, of 
which $1410 were received from George J. Tyler in the Char- 
lotte. Pearce reported his sales from the Nancy, and remained 
to clear the affairs of the ship Charlotte, which was in good 


order, though her cargo was tumbled and many articles miss- 
ing " in so much overhauling." This is the only case of mis- 
management I have found among supercargoes and captains. 

The Nancy was sent out again, in September 26, 1802, 
under Charles Remington, master, with a cargo of $14,738.75 
in character like her first. The voyage made a loss of 
$4927.83. At St. Christopher, on October 27, having been 
shut out from Martinique and Guadalupe, he reported " the 
Islands is full of Europe and East India goods." Next at St. 
Thomas, on the 31st, he had heard from Curacoa also, " dry 
goods is a drug, I wish I was at home and the goods in your 
stores again." 

We may get a glimpse of another branch of auxiliary com- 
merce in instructions to Daniel Olney for the new Ann and 
Hope, built after the wreck at Block Island on January 10, 
1806. Though the ship was intended for China, a voyage was 
projected to Savannah, Georgia, on December 24, 1807. Cap- 
tain Olney was directed there to get a freight of cotton for 
Liverpool at the best rate. The small amount of merchandise 
shipped was to be sold for the " best clean upland cotton." 
If the United States " must be engaged in Hostilities you 
are not to go to Liverpool, but invest proceeds property 
in cotton and return at once. Our calculation and reliance 
are upon a continuance of Peace." If practicable, he was to 
get permission to touch at Rhode Island; if not, he was to 
take freight for Liverpool without conditions. The owners' 
cotton might be carried on deck, well secured, if prudent. If 
he sailed to Liverpool, he was to copper the ship there, after 
sheathing her bottom with half-inch chestnut, then on board. 

Distribution of the merchandise brought from Europe and 
the East was an important function in this commerce. Large 
sales were made at home, and sometimes auctions were held 
by the Providence importers, which were attended by eager 
buyers from abroad. Fluctuations in American prices of teas 
were very great. Bohea varied in these years from thirty-two 
cents to eighty-seven. The merchants of Boston and New 
York usually furnished those markets by their own impor- 
tation or by direct purchase in Providence. Occasionally 
Brown and Ives consigned there. They made frequent con- 
signments to Nantucket, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Wilmington, 
North Carolina, and in specially large quantities to Charles- 


ton. Even Hartford received small regular shipments by 
schooner. All the imports were represented ; but teas, 
nankins, and china were shipped most frequently. 

As the inventive eighteenth century turned into the great 
expanding time of the nineteenth, the old eastern world — 
new in culture — opened up great opportunities for New Eng- 
land. Directly, she gained thereby the capital which enabled 
her to grasp Slater's spinning-machines, and to develop the 
factory system just being organized in Europe. By a rich 
fate the hand labor of the East, changed into capital by the 
commerce of Providence and Salem, enabled the Blackstone 
and later the Merrimac valley to set the labor-saving spindles 
at work. 

During the meeting remarks were made by the Presi- 
dent, Gamaliel Bradford, Andrew McFarland Davis, 
William Endicott, Edward Stanwood, and Albert 
Bushnell Hart, and by George Parker Winship, a 
Corresponding Member. 

Br * Hjj a '■ ' V ^H 

Mr ^ 

I w 


^V^^^x X^^c O^Li^ 






Solomon Lincoln became a member of this Society on 
November 10, 1887. He was born in Hingham, Massachusetts, 
on August 14, 1838. His ancestor Samuel Lincoln " came 
from Hingham, England, and settled in New Hingham, 1637, 
living some time in Salem." His descendants are numerous ; 
among them, President Abraham Lincoln. The father of the 
subject of this sketch was Solomon Lincoln, who became a 
member of this Society on January 30, 1845. The son attended 
private schools in Hingham and the Derby Academy. He 
was fitted for college at the private school of David B. Tower 
under the tuition of Ephraim W. Gurney, afterwards a pro- 
fessor at Harvard. He entered the Sophomore Class of 
Harvard College in 1854, and graduated in 1857, ranking first 
in his class. Among his classmates were Francis Bartlett, 
Francis O. French, Franklin Haven, James J. Higginson, 
John D. Long, Joseph May, Robert M. Morse, John C. Ropes, 
Robert D. Smith, A. J. C. Sowdon, J. Lewis Stackpole, James 
J. Storrow, Charles F. Walcott, and Samuel Wells. 

The next year he was appointed tutor at Harvard, holding 
that position first in Greek and Latin, then in Greek, and 
finally in Mathematics till July, 1863, during which year he 
attended the Harvard Law School, receiving the degree of 
LL.B. in 1864. 

January 26, 1864, he entered the law office of Stephen B. 
Ives, Jr., in Salem, Massachusetts ; was admitted to the bar 
in 1864, and became Mr. Ives's partner in 1865. The firm 
had offices in Salem and in Boston. It was dissolved in 1882, 
and his office and residence were thenceforward in Boston. 
His practice there was large and important. 


In 1874 he was aide-de-camp to Governor Talbot with the 
rank of Colonel, and in 1879 Governor Talbot's chief of staff. 
He was an overseer of Harvard College from 1882 to 1902, 
and for the last twelve years of that term president of the 
Board. In 1879 he was appointed by Governor Talbot a com- 
missioner to represent Massachusetts at a meeting at York- 
town, Virginia, of the governors of the original thirteen States ; 
and as such commissioner, in 1881, in the suite of Governor 
Long, he attended the Centennial Celebration there. 

He was elected a member of the American Antiquarian 
Society on April 26, 1882 ; was a trustee of Derby Academy 
in Hingham ; president at his death of the Unitarian Club of 
Boston ; a member of several social clubs like the Union and 
the St. Botolph ; since May 1, 1896, a trustee of the Boston 
Public Library, and president of the Board since May 12, 
1899. He was president of the Talbot Woollen Company. 

February 15, 1865, he married Ellen B., daughter of Hon. 
Joel Hayden, formerly Lieutenant-Governor of the Common- 
wealth. A daughter, Bessie, their only child, was born in 
1868, and is now the wife of Murray A. Potter, an instructor 
at Harvard College. Mrs. Lincoln and the wife of Governor 
Talbot were sisters. 

Mr. Lincoln for many years lived at No. 191 Commonwealth 
Avenue, Boston, where he died on October 15, 1907. 

For an appreciation of his character and qualities reference 
is made to the tribute paid him by his classmate John D. 
Long at a meeting of this Society held on November 14, which 
will be found on pages 189-193 of this volume. 






Peleg Whitman Chandler was born in New Gloucester, 
Maine, April 13, 1816. His father was Peleg Chandler, coun- 
sel lor-at-law, a graduate of Brown University, who died in 
1847. His grandfather, Peleg Chandler, a native of Duxbury, 
Massachusetts, emigrated to New Gloucester just prior to the 
Declaration of American Independence. He was an active 
and prominent citizen, and represented the town in the General 
Court of Massachusetts in 1784. The maternal grandfather of 
Mr. Chandler was Colonel Isaac Parsons, a native of Gloucester, 
Massachusetts, who went to New Gloucester in 1761, — a man 
of considerable fortune, who was held in high estimation. He 
was an officer in the Continental Army, and was several times 
elected a member of the General Court of Massachusetts from 
the District of Maine. 

The foregoing paragraph is copied entire from a brief bio- 
graphical sketch of himself on nine sheets of newspaper 
" copy paper " in the possession of his son, Horace Parker 

Mr. Chandler was fitted for Bowdoin College at the classical 
department of the Bangor Theological Seminary, entered col- 
lege in 1830, and was graduated with high honor in 1834, at 
the age of eighteen years. He studied law with his father, 
at the Harvard Law School, and in the office of his kinsman, 
Theophilus Parsons, in Boston. In 1837 he was admitted to 
the Suffolk bar, and remained in the active practice of his 
profession for almost half a century. For many years he 
was one of the most prominent practising lawyers of Boston 
in court cases ; but during almost one-half of his profes- 
sional life the infirmity of deafness compelled him to confine 



himself to the duties of consulting and office counsellor. He 
died of heart failure at his home, No. 154 Beacon Street, Boston, 
on May 28, 1889. In 1837, the same year in which he was ad- 
mitted to the bar, he was married to a daughter of Professor 
Parker Cleaveland of Bowdoin College. Mrs. Chandler died 
in November, 1881. They had four children, of whom three, 
a daughter and two sons, are living. 

From his earliest manhood Mr. Chandler was a prominent 
and influential character. In 1836, while still a law student, 
he formed a connection with the " Boston Daily Advertiser" 
as a reporter of legal proceedings. It was a new feature of 
daily journalism, and the work was performed with such judg- 
ment, accuracy and precision that his reports soon became 
indispensable to judges and lawyers. He continued in this 
service for several years ; and his connection with the " Daily 
Advertiser" and with its proprietor and its editors no doubt 
led to a still closer connection with it many years later, as 
will presently be narrated. 

It also led, March 10, 1838, to his establishment of " The 
[monthly] Law Reporter," which he edited until October, 
1847, and then disposed of to Stephen H. Phillips. " The 
Law Reporter" was conducted with great ability and had a 
considerable circulation, which extended to almost every State 
in the Union. 

Mr. Chandler's public services were great and of lasting 
value, although the present generation knows it not. He 
was elected to the Common Council in 1843, and was its 
president in 1844 and 1845. He was one of the " Hundred 
Boston Orators," having been chosen in 1844 to deliver the 
Fourth of July oration. In 1846 he was a member of the 
House of Representatives, and, as chairman of the committee 
on the subject, reported the act for supplying the city of 
Boston with pure water. In June of the same year he was 
elected city solicitor, and held the office until 1853, when he 
resigned. The City Council on that occasion adopted reso- 
lutions testifying to " the great value of his services to the 
city and his devotion to its interests during the period through 
which they have enjoyed the advantage of his eminent abil- 
ities." This was no mere routine compliment, for during his 
incumbency of the office nearly all the city ordinances were 
redrawn by him; and he prepared and published a volume 


containing all the ordinances of the city and a digest of the 
laws relating thereto. 

In 1854 Mr. Chandler was for a single year a member of the 
Executive Council. The Civil War brought him back into 
public life, and in 1862 and 1863 he was again a member of 
the General Court. His college and life-long friend, John 
A. Andrew, was governor of the Commonwealth, and enjoyed 
the benefit of Mr. Chandler's sound and sturdy counsel. 

No man was more intimately connected with the Back-bay 
improvement than was he. From the year 1856 onward he 
was counsel for corporations and persons interested in the 
future of that territory, and was actively engaged in all the 
controversies affecting it. There were conflicting claims to 
ownership, by the Commonwealth, the cities of Boston and 
Roxbury, riparian owners, and two great private corporations. 
Mr. Chandler was consulted in relation to the various con- 
tracts, was a leader — one might say the leader — in the move- 
ment which resulted in the transformation of the district, and 
drew the act, Chapter 210 of the Acts of 1859, under which 
the improvement was made. 

In 1841 Mr. Chandler published the first, and in 1844 the 
second, volume of a work entitled " American Criminal Trials." 
It was recognized as a most creditable production, received 
high praise in England as well as in this country, and in a few 
years was out of print. It was Mr. Chandler's original plan 
to make a somewhat extended series of these volumes, but the 
demands of his largely increased professional practice prevented 
him from carrying out the plan. It may be that it was this 
work which attracted the attention of this Society to him, for he 
was elected a member on January 25, 1844, being then in his 
twenty-eighth year. It is an interesting fact in our annals that 
he was, for a longer time than any other member, the junior 
in point of years, — more than eight years, — and ceased to be 
the junior only in 1852, when the position was given up to 
Francis Parkman. 1 

As a member of this Society, Mr. Chandler was an unusually 
regular and attentive rather than a productive member. He 
was chosen Treasurer the year after his admission, and held 
the office two years. His most important contributions to 
the Proceedings were a tribute to Rufus Choate 2 and an ad- 
1 2 Proceedings, ix. 95. 2 Proceedings, iv. 366-372. 


mirable memoir of his intimate friend Governor Andrew. 1 But 
Dr. Ellis in his remarks announcing Mr. Chandler's death said 
that he was almost always present at the meetings until his 
deafness rendered it impossible for him to hear what was said 
or know what was done. 

Mr. Chandler was a devoted friend of his Alma Mater, 
Bowdoin College, and the college was proud of him. It con- 
ferred upon him the degree of LL.D. in 1867 ; and in 1871 he 
was chosen a trustee, — a position which he held until his 
death. The choice was the more remarkable inasmuch as at 
that time the college was in the hands of governing boards 
which attached great importance to the denominational views 
of the professors. The election of a Swedenborgian as a 
trustee was a distinct abandonment of the ordinary practice. 
It happened that I was seated with Mr. Chandler in his sum- 
mer home at Brunswick, the former residence of Professor 
Cleaveland, when the notice of his election was brought to 
him ; and I remember the astonishment with which he rer 
ceived it, and his remark that they were " breaking out in a 
new spot." He was far too sensible a man to propose or sup- 
port any policy for the college that would alienate those who 
were then its most important patrons, the " Orthodox " Con- 
gregationalists of Maine. The change to a more liberal policy 
came, nevertheless, gradually and with the full consent of those 
who at first opposed it. 

All that has been written thus far shows Mr. Chandler as a 
many-sided man, but it records his activities in various direc- 
tions of which all the world might inform itself, or which it 
might even observe without very close scutiny of his actions. 
But the world has never learned the extent of his public 
service in another field, for he took careful pains that it should 
be known as little as possible. It chanced that I had better 
opportunities than any other person now living to see and 
appreciate this form of his service. 

Reference has already been made to his early connection 
with the " Boston Daily Advertiser." Although he ceased 
after a few years to be its law reporter, he continued to be 
associated with that newspaper as an outside contributor for 
many years, and ultimately became an owner of the property 
and a powerful agent in shaping its policy. The Rev. Dr. 
1 Proceedings, xviii. 41-64. 


E, E. Hale, in an interview with an " Advertiser " reporter just 
after Mr. Chandler's death, said that " for many years before 
Mr. Chandler himself took an active share in the direction of 
the 'Daily Advertiser' he was the confidential adviser of the 
gentlemen who had the responsibility of its editorial charge ; 
and they relied upon his opinion, not simply in matters of law, 
but, as all his friends did, in the important questions of social 
order and the real politics which lie beneath the transitory 
discussions of the day and give to them all their value." Mr. 
John C. Ropes, at the same time, said that when he was a 
student of law in Mr. Chandler's office, in 1859, it was a part 
of his duty to write out in a more legible hand the many 
articles which Mr. Chandler furnished to the " Advertiser." 

Nathan Hale's fifty years of activity as editor of the " Ad- 
vertiser" ended with his death in 1863. For a time his son, 
Charles Hale, and Charles F. Dunbar were joint editors. But 
in 1864 Mr. Hale was appointed Consul General to Egypt, 
and in the following year the newspaper property was sold to 
Dunbar, Waters and Company. The firm name first appeared 
on the issue of July 1, 1865. The firm consisted of Charles F. 
Dunbar, Edwin F. Waters, and Peleg W. Chandler, who 
owned the property in equal shares. Mr. Dunbar was the 
editor and Mr. Waters the publisher, and each of them re- 
ceived a salary. Mr. Chandler declined a salary, but made it 
a condition, instead, that he should be allowed to print, with- 
out question, whatever he might wish to write. It may easily 
be guessed that this arrangement did not always work well. 

If a personal reference may be permitted, I will say that 
early in 1866 I became the regular correspondent of the "Ad- 
vertiser " at Augusta, Maine, and in August, 1867, I joined the 
editorial staff of the paper, under Mr. Dunbar. Mr. Chandler 
took a fatherly interest in the young man, a fellow alumnus 
of Bowdoin, and during all the years ensuing until 1883, when 
my term of service on the " Advertiser " ended, he was a kind, 
helpful and confidential friend. As such he communicated to 
me many of the incidents in the administration and conduct of 
the paper, as to which secrecy was enjoined and observed. 

Mr. Dunbar, as well as Mr. Chandler, was a man of strong 
opinions ; but even more than that he was a journalist of the 
school — now nearly extinct — which holds that the influence 
of a newspaper depends largely upon its consistency. An 


editorial position once taken was not to be abandoned, cer- 
tainly not lightly. Under the arrangement mentioned it was 
in Mr. Chandler's power to establish the policy of the paper, 
and Mr. Dunbar had either to surrender his own judgment or 
to withhold his pen, when he disagreed with the silent partner. 
Occasions of this sort were nevertheless rare, for on most pub- 
lic questions the two men could be in hearty agreement. 

As Mr. Chandler was, in addition to other qualities, an ex- 
cellent business man, he was not always in accord with the 
publisher, Mr. Waters, who nevertheless conducted the paper 
for nearly twenty years with much success. In such circum- 
stances Mr. Chandler could usually have the support of Mr. 
Dunbar in opposition to any plan which seemed injudicious. 
Those who remember the " Advertiser " in the sixties and 
seventies will understand that such differences do not imply 
a lack of good judgment on either side. When the new owners 
took hold of the paper in 1865, its chief asset was a high rep- 
utation for editorial ability, sincerity and right-mindedness, 
They undertook to introduce enterprise in the collection and 
presentation of news, and did so, as far as their means per- 
mitted. The differences just referred to extended no further 
than to questions whether an improvement desirable in itself 
was judicious in view of the earnings and resources of the 
establishment. Mr. Waters was the more venturesome, Mr. 
Chandler the more prudent ; which of them was more often 
right is a question that cannot be answered confidently. 

In 1869 an important change took place in the ownership of 
the " Advertiser." Mr. Dunbar had previously retired from the 
editorship, and had been succeeded by Delano A. Goddard. 
Certain prominent manufacturers and commercial men of Bos- 
ton, in order to have an organ in the city which should sup- 
port the policy of a protective tariff, — a subject on which the 
" Advertiser" had previously been studiously silent, — proposed 
to purchase a minority interest? in the paper. They were ten 
in number, and they acquired an interest amounting to twenty 
forty-fifths. Mr. Dunbar sold his entire share, one-third ; Mr. 
Chandler parted with one-third of his own share, — one-ninth 
of the property ; Mr, Waters retained his holding. For a va- 
riety of reasons Mr. Chandler chose to disappear as still an 
avowed owner of a share in the " Advertiser." He placed that 
share in the hands of a trustee who, of course, followed im- 


plicitly his instructions. Some amusing stories could be told 
of the complications to which this arrangement gave rise, and 
of the security in which Mr. Chandler continued to exercise 
undiminished his influence over the policy of the paper. But 
this is not the place to narrate them. It should nevertheless 
be said, lest a false impression be derived from the last sen- 
tence, that the relations between Mr. Chandler and Mr. God- 
dard, whose amiable and gentle nature the older members of 
this Society will recall, were always agreeable, and their views 
on public questions rarely differed. 

Thus, during a period of twenty years, while the " Advertiser" 
was among Boston newspapers the most conspicuous and in- 
fluential leader of public opinion, Mr. Chandler was in a posi- 
tion, if not to dictate, at least to modify profoundly the policy 
of the paper on public questions. He was not a meddler. He 
did not annoy the editors by frequent contributions or by 
nagging criticisms. But I can testify from personal knowledge 
that his right to set forth his own views as the opinion of the 
journal was scrupulously respected when he chose to exercise it, 
and that his manuscript went to the composing-room unedited. 
Moreover, he was swift to praise. An inquiry of the editor 
as to the authorship of an article that pleased was followed by 
a note to the young writer, which he prized even if he 
could not make out every word of Mr. Chandler's difficult 

In his personal dealings with clients and with those con- 
nected with the " Advertiser " his deafness was less of a handi- 
cap than might be supposed. Indeed, in some respects it gave 
him an advantage over his interlocutor. He was provided with 
a flexible tube a yard or more in length, having an ear-piece 
and a mouth-piece. He kept one end to his ear while asking 
questions and receiving the answers, but as soon as he knew 
all he wished to learn from the person who sat at the other 
end of the tube, he took both ends of it in one hand, and 
refused to observe even the most frantic motions of his hearer 
intended to signify a wish to take part in the conversation. 
He had the floor, and he held it. Even when the interview 
was at an end he did not offer the speaking end of the tube 
to the poor fellow who wished to say a word for himself. For 
of course interviews of this sort were usually occasions when 
he was giving a direction which admitted of no refusal, or 


administering a reproof which could be very severe although 
never unkind. 

He made effective use of his physical infirmity on many occa- 
sions in his practice before the courts. Many are the anecdotes 
of his skill in disregarding the warnings of a judge that he was 
transcending his rights as counsel, and of his refusal to hear 
more than he wished of the answers he had put to witnesses. 

Although perhaps undue stress has been laid in this sketch 
upon his hidden influence as a power behind a public journal, 
he was pre-eminently a lawyer, and for many years maintained 
a position among the leaders of the Suffolk bar. In early life 
he resolved never to undertake criminal cases, and to that 
resolution he adhered. 

One of the traits of Mr. Chandler which was known to his 
family and his intimate associates only, was a deeply religious 
nature. Not that he studiously concealed it or was ashamed 
of it; but he did not obtrude his religion, and those who had 
business dealings with him and encountered his strong per- 
sonality had no reason to suspect the other side of his charac- 
ter. He left an unfinished account of his early years, and 
particularly of his college life, written evidently many years 
before he wrote the brief autobiography mentioned at the 
beginning of this sketch. In that manuscript he describes a 
religious "revival" that took place during his college course. 
He represents himself as totally unmoved by the sensational 
preaching and terrifying exhortations of those who conducted 
the revival. But he was led to make a close and calm study 
of religious matters, and accidentally he fell under the gentle 
influence of one who had accepted Emanuel Swedenborg as 
the expounder of a new faith. Mr. Chandler embraced the 
doctrines of Swedenborgianism at that time and cherished 
them to the end. Some of his letters to personal friends 
which are still preserved show how near he felt the spiritual 
world to be. The late Hon. Charles Theodore Russell has 
told in graceful and sympathetic words his experience, on a 
visit to Mr. Chandler's summer home in Brunswick, of the 
simple and sincere action of this masterful lawyer as priest in 
his own family. In 1867 he published anonymously a small 
volume on " Observations on the Authenticity of the Gospels," 
the reasoning of which displays all his acumen as a lawyer, 
and its tone is one of the deepest reverence. 


It would not be easy to summarize briefly the qualities 
that made him so noteworthy a man. The word masterful, 
just used, goes a long way toward explaining his success and 
prominence in a city where at the beginning he had no friends, 
no acquaintances, no influence outside of himself, and to which 
he brought nothing but his brains, his will and his industry. 
But his inborn power of leadership was supplemented by many 
other qualities, without which he could not have attained the 
eminence he reached. Some of them were touched upon by 
his associates at the bar, at the memorial meeting held on 
June 7, 1889, in language which might seem extravagant to 
persons who did not know him. More than one of them bore 
testimony to his ability to see the fundamental principle of 
any question before him, — a faculty which has sometimes been 
termed " horse sense." ■" I think," said the late Judge E. 
Rockwood Hoar, " that Mr. Chandler in his prime was the 
best jury lawyer of the Commonwealth, with perhaps the 
exception, which everybody must recognize in that relation, 
of Mr. Choate — utterly different, of course." The Hon. 
Charles Theodore Russell said that Mr. Chandler had " two 
qualities that made him an indomitable champion of a cause, 
and gave him the most formidable weapon in the armory of 
intellectual combat. He had an iron determination of will. 
When, after full deliberation upon a matter, he had made up 
his mind, he could not be moved. He might be ground to 
powder, but his purpose would abide. . . . The other quality 
is ridicule, and Mr. Chandler was the king who wielded it." 
Other speakers referred to this power, by which in jury trials 
he often turned the position of opposing counsel. It was a 
part of his equipment of humor, his love of and power to per- 
ceive the humorous aspect of any situation, which helped to 
make him the most agreeable and vivacious of companions. 
Indeed he was noted as a raconteur who could bring out the 
humorous point of a story in such a way as to produce a 
hearty laugh, in which he joined with great gusto. Professor 
James B. Thayer put much in a few words when he said that 
Mr. Chandler brought to his chosen calling" a vigorous physi- 
cal frame, energy, and a rugged courage, the sound principles 
and frugal and laborious habits of the old New England tradi- 
tion, and an extraordinary sagacity, good sense, and power of 
influencing men." In short, as Judge Hoar said, " he was a 



large man, physically, mentally, and in character throughout." 
And yet he, like almost every other of the speakers on that 
occasion, declared that he knew and loved him best as a friend. 
I wish to close this brief tribute to him with the same word. 
He was to me a wise counsellor who did not always approve 
my written words, but was always a kind and affectionate 



The stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 9th instant, 
at three o'clock, p. m. ; the President in the chair. 

The record of the December meeting was read and approved ; 
and the Librarian read the list of donors to the Library since 
the last meeting. 

The Cabinet-Keeper reported that the bust of George Ban- 
croft, recently obtained for the Societ}', had been placed in the 
corridor on the upper landing. 

Frederic Winthrop, of Hamilton, was elected a Resident 
Member, and John Bagnell Bury, of King's College, Cam- 
bridge, England, a Corresponding Member. Henry Adams, 
of Washington, D. C, on the Corresponding roll, was elected 
an Honorary Member. 

Samuel S. Shaw presented a memoir of Henry G. Denny, 
which he had been appointed to prepare for publication in the 

Charles C. Smith presented a " Short Account" of the 
Society, and said: 

At the Annual Meeting of this Society in 1882 Mr. Winsor, 
at that time the Corresponding Secretary, offered a vote " that 
the Treasurer [Mr. Smith] be requested to report to the Society, 
for printing in its Proceedings, a succinct historical sketch of 
the Society, which can also be annexed to the pamphlet con- 
taining the Act of Incorporation and By-Laws, — the same to 
be sent to new members on their election." In compliance 
with this vote, which was referred to the Council with full 
power and by them adopted, I reported at the October meeting 
a " Short Account," 1 afterward printed in a leaflet of three 
pages, and reprinted 2 in December, 1893, in the same form. 
As there are but few copies remaining of this leaflet, and as the 
conditions have greatly changed since it was first written, it 
has seemed to me desirable to revise the account and bring it 
down to the present time. I now respectfully submit it in a 
new draft, with only the necessary changes from the original 

1 1 Proceedings, xix. 265, 390-392. 2 2 Proceedings, viii. 473. 


Short Account of the Society. 

The Massachusetts Historical Society is the oldest historical 
society in the United States, and had its origin in the new life 
inspired by the adoption of the Federal Constitution. Its 
chief founder was the Rev. Jeremy Belknap, at that time min- 
ister of the religious society worshipping in the Federal Street 
meeting-house in Boston, and known as the author of a History 
of New Hampshire, which still holds a foremost place among 
State histories. With him were associated four other students 
of early American history, all of them under fifty years of age, 
— the Rev. John Eliot, minister of the New North Church ; 
the Rev. Peter Thacher, minister of the Brattle Street Church ; 
William Tudor, a prominent lawyer in Boston ; and James 
Winthrop, of Cambridge, at that time one of the Justices of 
the Court of Common Pleas for Middlesex County. Having 
formed the general plan of the Society, these gentlemen invited 
the co-operation of five other historical scholars, — the Rev. 
James Freeman, minister of King's Chapel ; James Sullivan, 
afterward Governor of the State ; Thomas Wallcut, a zealous 
antiquary ; William Baylies, a well-known physician of Dighton, 
who had served in each Provincial Congress of Massachusetts ; 
and George Richards Minot, author of a " Continuation of the 
History of the Province of Massachusetts Bay" and a "His- 
tory of the Insurrections in Massachusetts," known as Shays's 
Rebellion. On the 24th of January, 1791, less than two years 
after the organization of a national government, eight of the 
little group met at the house of Mr. Tudor, which stood on 
Court Street, at the corner of what was then known as Prison 
Lane (1722), subsequently (1841) named Court Square. Those 
thus brought together adopted a constitution limiting the 
number of members to " thirty citizens of the Commonwealth 
of Massachusetts," and organized the Society. At the next 
meeting several of the members handed in lists of books and 
manuscripts which they were willing to give toward the forma- 
tion of an historical library. These gifts form the nucleus of 
the priceless collection now owned by the Society, and num- 
bering at the date of the annual meeting in 1907 about 50,000 
bound volumes, nearly 110,000 pamphlets, and upward of 4,700 
broadsides. The collection of historical manuscripts, it is 


believed, is larger and more important than that owned by any 
similar society in the United States. 

Three years after its first meeting, the Society was incorpo- 
rated, in February, 1794, by an act of the Legislature, which 
restricted the number of members to sixty, exclusive of Hon- 
orary Members " residing without the limits of this Common- 
wealth " ; but by an additional act passed in 1857 the Society 
was authorized to enlarge its list of Resident Members to one 
hundred. This continues to be the limit to the number of 
members residing within the State. There is no charter re- 
striction on the number of Corresponding or Honorary Mem- 
bers who may be elected ; but by an understanding in the 
nature of unwritten law, reached after careful deliberation 
at the February meeting of 1894, the number of Honorary 
Members is limited to ten, and the number of Corresponding 
Members to fifty. It is understood that the choice of Hon- 
orary Members should be further restricted, and looked upon 
as a recognition on the part of the Society of what is consid- 
ered by it supreme accomplishment in the field of historical 
work. 1 

From the first the objects of the Society have been the 
collection, preservation, and diffusion of the materials for 
American history; and so early as 1792 the first volume of 
Collections was printed. This volume has been twice re- 
printed, and up to the present time has been followed by 
sixty-five other volumes, comprising in part reprints of scarce 
publications relating to American history, and in part original 
memoirs, and .early letters and other documents which had 
never before been printed. Among the more important docu- 
ments thus made accessible are Hubbard's History of New 
England and Bradford's History of Plymouth, both of which 
were first printed by the Society, Governor Bradford's Letter- 
Book, the Body of Liberties, the correspondence with reference 
to the donations to the town of Boston after the passage of the 
Boston Port Bill, Judge Se wall's Diary and Letter-Books, and 
important collections of Winthrop, Mather, Belcher, Belknap, 
Pepperrell, Trumbull, Heath, Warren, Jefferson, Bowdoin 
and Temple Papers, etc. Beside these volumes the Society 
has also printed forty volumes of Proceedings, covering the 
record of all its meetings for one hundred and seventeen 

i 2 Proceedings, x. 326; xv. 51-54; xx. 396. 


years, and including numerous historical documents of perma- 
nent value, and discussions by the members on interesting or 
important historical questions. In the Collections or Pro- 
ceedings are memoirs of nearly all the deceased members of 
the Society, including many of the most distinguished men 
of their time in Massachusetts. A gallery of historical por- 
traits has been formed, and many interesting relics have been 
gathered and placed under the charge of the Cabinet-Keeper, 
beside which the Appleton collection of coins and medals 
was bequeathed to the Society, which is also the custodian of 
other similar treasures. 

At three different periods courses of public lectures have 
been given under the auspices of the Society, for the promo- 
tion of the objects for which it was formed. Of these only 
one has been published, — a course of twelve lectures on sub- 
jects relating to the early history of Massachusetts, delivered 
before the Lowell Institute in the early part of 1869. 

As the Society neared the end of its first hundred years of 
active work, it was evident that an enlargement of methods had 
become necessary in order to keep abreast of the demand.s of 
a new century ; and in 1889 a salaried editor was appointed 
to take charge of the publication of the Collections and Pro- 
ceedings, — the work of the members having been wholly gra- 
tuitous down to that time. In 1907 a still greater change 
was made by abolishing the admission fee and the annual as- 
sessment on Resident Members, thus placing Resident Mem- 
bership on the same footing as Honorary and Corresponding 
Membership, honoris causa, with only the implied obligation 
that each person, according to the measure of his ability and 
opportunity, shall endeavor to promote the objects for which 
the Society was founded. 

In its earliest years the Societ}' had no established place of 
meeting; but in 1794 it received from several gentlemen, not 
members, the gift of an upper room over the arch in the Tontine 
Crescent, on the southerly side of what is now known as 
Franklin Street, where it remained until its removal in 1833 
to the newly erected building of the Provident Institution 
for Savings, on Tremont Street adjacent to the King's Chapel 
Burial-ground, of which it then became part owner and after- 
ward sole owner. In 1899 it removed to the building which 
it now owns and occupies at the corner of Boylston Street 


and the Fenway, on land reclaimed from the tide long after 
the formation of the Society. 

At the annual meeting in April, 1907, the Society held 
twenty-two permanent funds, of an aggregate amount of about 
$388,000, of which about one-fifth had come from persons who 
were not members of the Society or from their legal represent- 
atives. One of these benefactors, Thomas Dowse, also gave 
during his own life his large and valuable private library ; 
and the cost of fitting up the room in which his books are 
kept and the Society holds its meetings was defrayed by the 
executors of his will. Rev. Robert C. Waterston, a member 
for nearly thirty -four years, gave the greater part of his library, 
and by his will left a sufficient sum for fitting up a room for 
its safe-keeping, which has been designated as the Waterston 
Room. The Ellis Hall commemorates the gift of the dwelling- 
house of the Rev. Dr. George E. Ellis, seventh President, which 
under the provisions of his will was sold, and the proceeds 
applied toward the erection of the building now occupied by 
the Society. 

The Society has been fortunate in having had only eight 
Presidents since its organization, — James Sullivan, Christopher 
Gore, John Davis, Thomas L. Winthrop, James Savage, 
Robert C. Winthrop, George E. Ellis, and Charles Francis 
Adams. Mr. Savage and Mr. R. C. Winthrop together served 
for forty-four consecutive years (1841-1885). 

Roger B. Merriman read a paper on a neglected phase 
of Queen Elizabeth's treatment of her Catholic subjects in 

James F. Hunnewell, in presenting a large photographic 
likeness of Richard Frothingham, Treasurer of the Society 
from 1847 to 1877, spoke as follows : 

It is proposed that this Society shall have portraits of its 
past Treasurers, To the collection allow me to add a portrait 
of Richard Frothingham. Measuring twenty-one by twenty- 
eight inches, it is from a small card photograph, and is the 
best likeness obtainable. It is enlarged nineteen diameters 
by Mr. Baldwin Coolidge. 

In the Proceedings (second series, I. 381-393) for Febru- 
ary, 1885, there is a memoir of Mr. Frothingham, written by 


Charles Deane. I add only a few words to recall the story 
of the Treasurer's life. 

Richard Frothingham was born in Charlestown, on Jan- 
uary 31, 1812, and died on January 29, 1880. Descended 
from ancestors who were among the founders of the town in 
1630, but whose previous history does not yet appear to be 
given correctly in type, he inherited and kept a strong local 
attachment, inborn reliability, and an abiding good name. 
Personally he showed three marked characteristics. He had 
great aptitude for office, and held with general satisfaction a 
large number and variety of official positions. With a strong 
liking for politics, he was a Democrat of the old school. At 
the outbreak of the Civil War, when there was uncertainty 
about the action of party men who had been under Southern 
influence, his leader — " Stand by the Flag " — rang out like 
a trumpet call to rally for the Union. He was a strong parti- 
san, but a stronger patriot. He had, and it was a controlling 
part of his nature, the historic sense that shaped his chief 
life-work. For subjects he began with his native town, and 
expanded to the development of the nation. He was a nota- 
ble man, — one of the old worthies of this Society. 

Through more than half a century I have had pleasant per- 
sonal acquaintance with the Treasurers here, — nearly half of 
that time with Richard Frothingham, and I am glad to help 
others to see him as I saw my old friend. 

Mr. Hunnewell also read the following paper : 

Three Early Washington Monuments. 

During travels in the summer certain notable places are 
visited by some of us, and an account of a few of them may 
be worth giving ; and a part of the pleasure we have had in 
our excursions may, in some degree, be shared with others. 
Our personal tastes may influence both travels and subjects. 

Born on Bunker Hill and still having there my old library 
for almost daily visits, I have naturally been attracted to a 
Bunker Hill in Derbyshire, and to another in Devon. I by 
the way may remark that I have recently seen in the Proceed- 
ings (second series, XX. 474) for November, 1906, wonder 
expressed that I called the hill in Derbyshire prehistoric. 
I have no change to make in the title, or the article, unless it 


may be to add further proof. That lonely weird hill with 
human work evidently dating back to a remote past was very 

Among many places and objects seen during the past sum- 
mer, let me speak of three in England that have a distinctly 
American connection and interest. Each of them is far out of 
the busy world of to-day, and each is reached by a delightful 
ride in a most serviceable motor-carriage. Our first excursion 
was from Leamington to Sulgrave. No one whom we could 
find knew anything about Sulgrave, and we had no map. 
Sulgrave is ignored by small maps as I have found them. 
Any one who thinks that there is no research involved in 
such a hunt for historic evidence should inquire and find 
the way over the five and twenty or thirty miles of country 
between the two places. We headed for Banbury, some- 
where beyond which was our destination, and we reached 
that interesting old town, perhaps two-thirds of our way, be- 
fore we gained definite information. Then we had a clue 
from sign-boards bearing the name, and in good time we 
reached the end of our journey. 

Sulgrave is a small, very secluded, and quiet village. On 
slightly rising ground stands its little old church, from which 
gently slopes its one street lined by irregularly placed low 
gray houses. At the farther end, to the right and back from 
the street, stands the manor house, long ago the home of the 
Washingtons. It is irregularly square, with two stories and 
gables, built of small stones, with quoins of larger stones now 
gray except on what might be called the front, which is yel- 
lowish rough-cast. At the left of this front is a projecting 
part with a Tudor-arched door, and a gable in the apex of 
which, dimly seen, are the Washington arms, covered by glass 
and put out of harm's way and acquisitive reach. It has been 
proved that there is need enough of precaution. The roof of 
the house is of flat stones, dark and lichenous. 

Adjoining the house, to the right, enclosed by an old stone 
wall, is a garden with vegetables and flowers. Most of the 
side of the house toward it is mantled with ivy. On the oppo- 
site side of the house, and also adjoining it, is a barnyard. The 
building, indeed, is now a farmhouse, of an estate of one hun- 
dred and ninety-three acres. All around, and on two sides 
reaching the house, are fields ; and farther back is rural pros* 



pect. In the lower story, with windows on the garden side and 
the front, is a square room with a flat ceiling crossed at right 
angles by two very dark beams that thus form a cross. On 
the inner side is a large fireplace ; on another is a four-day, 
square-headed window. It is a simple, good-sized comfortable 
room, quaint but not fine. Over it is a square chamber, even 
plainer, with the ceiling rising part way on the slope of the 
roof, and with a floor of old wide boards, now dark. In this 
room, we were told, Lawrence, ancestor of George Washington, 
was born. 

The lineage of Lawrence Washington in America was for a 
long time known distinct to the sea, but the English connec- 
tion was not found until 1884 or 1885, when Mr. Henry F. 
Waters, in his important researches, discovered it, a successful 
close being reached, he tells us, on June 3, 1889. 1 The result 
is the more notable since the name, as he also shows us, is 
found in nineteen counties that he mentions. From Presi- 
dent George Washington the line seems clearly traced through 
Augustine and Lawrence to John, who came to Virginia in 
1633 or 1631, and from him to Lawrence of Sulgrave and 
Brington, son of Robert, son of Lawrence, grantee of Sul- 
grave, who died 19th of February, 26th of Elizabeth, 1584. 
Robert " of Sulgrave Esq.," jointly with Lawrence (son), sold 
Sulgrave " 8 Jac." (1611). 

Visiting Sulgrave, we are impressed both by its character- 
istics and its wide contrast with Mount Vernon, and also by 
certain transmitted qualities. Sulgrave, in size and style not 
one of the lordly rural English class, not the seat of high rank 
and fortune, but the home of a substantial squire, is solid and 
enduring, centuries old and yet strong enough to last through 
more. On its low, secluded site, it has none of the lordly, 
commanding position and aspect of the house that overlooks 
the broad green slopes and the wide sweep of the Potomac. 
Yet, if well cared for, its endurance may fully match that of 
the American mansion. Each of the houses was the home of 
solid worth and of good old English qualities. At Sulgrave 
we are impressed by the wonder that from it, secluded and 
quiet as it is and always must have been, grew the life and the 
name now a continental household word and a world-wide 

1 Henry F. Waters, Genealogical Gleanings in England, 364. 


There is something else to see in this small village. It is 
the small church, mentioned above, built of small gray stones, 
with a low and stout tower at its western end, that internally 
is open to a nave of four bays with aisles, and a chancel. The 
roofs are of dark, open-timber work. At the eastern end of 
the south aisle, in the floor, is the Washington memorial, — 
no modern thing, but old evidence that the Washingtons 
worshipped there. 

In his will, proved January 3, 1620, Robert " of Souldgrave " 
states that he is " to be buried in the South Aisle of the church 
before my seat where I usually sit, under the same stone that 
my father lieth buried under." 1 The stone, a large one, now 
bears a brass with three long lines of inscription in small 
black letter including the date 1564 (?). Other and impor- 
tant brass plates, the sockets for which are seen, have dis- 
appeared. There were six plates let into the stone, one of 
them with figures of four sons, and another of four daughters. 
On or about August 10, 1889, two strangers " in gentlemanly 
attire" visited the church, and then they and most of the 
brasses disappeared. 2 Two thieves escaped. Not all of the bar- 
barians were active during the decline of the Roman Empire. 

It may be added that during our long drive of some fifty- 
five miles we passed hardly a village, and few houses for a 
central part of a densely inhabited country, and also few vehi- 
cles. The one exceptional place was Banbury, a large and 
interesting town, with a tall and elegant Gothic cross, restored 
and in good order. The country traversed is rural, undulating, 
moderately wooded, with some considerable hills where 
the winding road has really long ascents and descents. 
Everywhere is old English rural beauty. 

Our next drive to a Washington monument was from 
Cheltenham, and was even more varied and beautiful. Cross- 
ing the northerly part of the Cleve hills, that commands a 
wide and magnificent view of lowlands and of the Malvern 
and Welsh hills, — all far higher and bolder than our Blue 
hills, — we thence dove into a deep valley and passed through 
the picturesque and very old English town of Winchcombe, 
long, stone-built, and gray. Sixteen miles of drive brought us 
to Broadway, a village with an unusually wide street that 

1 Henry F. Waters, Genealogical Gleanings in England, 377. 

2 Ibid. 397. 


may have given the name, or that may have come from the 
Broadways, an old family of this region. The street is lined 
by stone or rough-cast houses, midway among which is the 
Lygon Arms, originally the " Whyte Hart," ranking among 
the very old, quaint, and good English inns. It has two stories, 
built of cut stone, with four gables, and a Jacobean style of 
stone doorway dated 1620. In the days of the Pilgrim 
Fathers it was flourishing, and it is also to-day in the age of the 
motor, that has revived or maintained not a few of the out-of- 
the-way houses; and there is pleasant life in its well-kept, 
oak-lined, and oak-ceiled rooms, that were probably known to 
some of the Washingtons. From there we drove a few miles 
to Wickhamford, which has a Washington monument. 

Wickhamford is a small and very retired hamlet of small 
brick houses, a few of them modern, others old and thatched. 
At one side stands the manor house of brick, with gables, 
and now washed a yellowish color. Adjoining it is the 
churchyard, and in that the church, rough-cast on the outside, 
which is small, built of smoothly cut stones, now gray, with a 
small, square west tower, and a south porch, also small, as are 
the nave and chancel. Internally the nave has a double-pitch 
framed roof, and the chancel a three-faced plastered ceiling. 
This is where the Washingtons of the Sulgrave line also wor- 
shipped. Along the north side of the chancel are two canopied 
tombs of a sort that surprise us in out-of-the-way places in 
England. They are in elaborate Jacobean style. Each has 
two recumbent figures of members of the Sandys family ; their 
dates are 1629 and 1680. The great object of interest is, 
however, a large oblong slab of slate, the foot of which touches 
the eastern wall of the chancel under the altar table. At its 
top are cut the Washington arms, a suggestion of the American 
flag, — -three stars above two bars, or bands. Under these is 
a long inscription, beginning : 

M. S. 

Filise peril] ustris & militari virtute clarissimi 

Henrici Washington collonelli 

Gulielmo Washington ex agro Northanton. 

Milite prognati. 

Nineteen lines follow, in the last of which is the date of the 
lady's death, " Feb. 27, 1697." She was unmarried, daughter 


of Henry, colonel in the Royalist army, son of Sir William, 
who was son of Lawrence of Sulgrave, who died on December 
13, 1616. 1 

Here again we find an example of the rural seclusion, as well 
as good position, in which members of George Washington's 
family lived in England, and of places with which they were 
familiar that remain substantially unchanged to our time. It 
is a pleasure to search old records or printed leaves to learn 
more about persons and things past ; and it is, perhaps, an 
even greater pleasure to search for and visit the monumental, 
visible records of the valued past. Many facts are, or only 
can be, preserved by written or printed statement. It would, 
however, be a rare written or printed account that would, for 
instance, give as clear evidence of the life of the early Wash- 
ington as is given by the old house at Sulgrave. 

Albert Matthews communicated the paper given below : 

A Proposal for the Enlargement op University Learning 
in New England, 1658-1660. 

At the present time one's thoughts naturally turn to the 
College across the Charles, and I venture to communicate two 
documents which, so far as I have been able to ascertain, have 
escaped the attention of the historians of the College. In the 
records of the General Court, under date of October 19, 1658, 
occurs the following : 

The Court, having pervsed & considered of seuerall letters & a 
comission written & signed to M r Nathaniell Bacon, Herbert Pelham, 
Rich Saltonstall, Henry Ashurst, Esq, M r W m Hooke, M r Jn° Knowles, 
& M Thomas Allen, ministers of y e gospell, &c, by the counsell, doe 
approove thereof, and ordered a letter to be wrote to Richard Sal- 
tonstall, Esq, from this Court, signifying theire acceptanc & allowance 
of the councills acts, w ch are in y e councills booke at large. 2 

1 Henry F. Waters, Genealogical Gleanings in England, 385. 

2 Massachusetts Colony Records, iv. (part i.) 362. The Rev. Thomas Allen 
(1608-1673), the Rev. John Knowles (1600-1685), the Rev. William Hooke 
(1600-1677), Henry Ashurst (1614-1680), Herbert Pelham (1600-1673), and 
Richard Saltonstall (1610-1694), are too well known to need comment. Nathan- 
iel Bacon (1593-1660) was the son of Edward Bacon and the grandson of Sir 
Nicholas Bacon. It is perhaps worth while to call attention to an annoying error 
that has crept into the "Index and Epitome" to the "Dictionary of National 
Biography." Sir Nicholas Bacon had by his first wife, Jane Fernley, three 
sons, Nicholas (died 1624), Nathaniel (died 1622), and Edward (died 1618). All 


The " councills booke at large " has unfortunately not been 
preserved, and no copy of the commission or of the letter is to 
be found in the Massachusetts Archives. Nevertheless from 
an unexpected source it is possible to reproduce the commis- 
sion, or at least a portion of it. For some reason which cannot 
now be explained, this letter was not sent until the next meet- 
ing of the General Court, which was on May 11, 1659. Upon 
its receipt by the trustees appointed under the commission, 
they apparently at once wrote for further instructions ; and it 
is certain that such instructions were sent in a letter dated 
September 20, 1659, though this letter has not been preserved. 
Then, upon receiving the additional instructions, the trustees 
drew up the " Humble Proposal " given below. When this 
was printed as a broadside for distribution, three of the trust- 
ees — Saltonstall, Ashurst, and Hooke — wrote a letter enclos- 
ing a copy and giving an account of what they had thus far 
accomplished. Though this letter is not dated, it was pre- 
sumably written between January 17 and March 24, 1659-60. 
Both the letter and the broadside are now in the Massachusetts 

The broadside 1 follows : 

An Bumble PROPOSAL, for the hilar gement of University 
Learning in | New England, By the TRUSTEES hereafter 
named, to whom the Manage- | ment of this Affair is committed. 

THE Good People of this Nation, as they are, and have been 
Honourable for their professed Love, to the hated wayes and 
truths of Christ in those perillous and evil times, which some 
years since we saw ; so are they also no less worthy of acknow- 
ledgment, for their indeared affection to his Faithful Servants, who 
were then exposed to cruel sufferings by that evil Generation, of whom, 
as now it is, so, we hope it will be ever true concerning them, which 
the Prophet speaks in another case : Thou art cast out like a Branch 
that is abominable, like the raiment of them that are slain, thrust through 
with a Sword, and as a Carcass trodden under foot. 

three of these sons are mentioned by Mr. Sidney Lee at the end of his sketch of 
their father in the " Dictionary of National Biography." and are, as they should 
be, separately entered in the " Index and Epitome" ; but in that volume Nathaniel 
Bacon (1593-1660), one of our trustees, is described as "puritan ; half-brother of 
Francis Bacon and son of Sir Nicholas Bacon." In short, the uncle and nephew 
have been confused. 

1 Massachusetts Archives, lviii. 38. 


The special subjects of that wrath and rage which then appeared, in 
those wicked and unreasonable men, were the good old Non-Conform- 
ists, to which Tribe, the People of New England, both by joynmg to 
bear witness against all Traditions of men in the Worship of God ; and 
by pertaking with them in the afflictions of the Gospel are most neerly 
related ; of them, it may be said, they feared not the wrath of man, 
when it was like the roaring of a Lyon, but they indured as seeing him 
who is invisible, esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches then 
the revenues of England : Hence it was, that they so willingly suffered 
the spoiling of their goods, the leaving of their dearest friends, the loss of 
their native Country, to the peril of their lives, both by Land and Sea; 
and though the Lord hath led them to a Wilderness, where they have 
been as a People separated from their brethren and exposed to dwell 
alone in solitary places, yet they can and doe declare to the praise of his 
love and goodness, that he hath not been a barren Wilderness to them, 
nor a Land of Darkness ; but hath testified his signal owning of them, 
by providing for them in those ends of the earth, where he hath set them 
down in quiet habitations, with rest round about, under the fulness of 
the blessing of the Gospel of Christ, accompanied with a Godly Orthodox 
and Learned Ministry, the propagation whereof (as the outward and 
visible means of such a blessing) is their present and great endeavour. 

And because, as sometimes David said upon the like occasion, They 
will not serve the Lord with that which cost them nothing ; they have 
according to their ability, if not above, and beyond it, (considering their 
great losses, and other yearly burdens in reference to publick affairs) 
laid some foundation for a Seminary of Learning, the ordinary means 
whereby the Lord is pleased to make way for the free passage of his 
everlasting Gospel, which they look at and rejoyce in, as the standing 
portion and entailed inheritance of them and theirs for ever. 

We cannot but be very sensible in their behalf, how much the Lord 
hath smiled upon their small beginnings, by succeeding the studious 
endeavours of those, who have been trained up in their Gambridg, of 
whom some are eminently useful among themselves at this present, and 
of the [re] st, many, who have been called forth into other parts, both 
of America and Europe, have given large, and full proof of [t]heir 
faithfulness and fitness [for th]e work of the service of the House of 
God, which we take as a token for good, superadded to all other 
obligations under Gods kind dealings with his People of New-England. 

We must now crave leave, as in their names, humbly to recommend 
and propose that foundation for University Learning (which hath been 
laid by them) to be both every way inlarged, as also to be built upon, 
by the goodness and favour of their ever honoured, their deerly beloved 
Brethren, and worthy Christian Friends in England, who work the 
work of the Lord as they also do: And according to our present 


instructions, we shall only address our selves to such Persons of Worth 
and Reputation among the People of God, who are (in spiritual re- 
spects) neer of kin to the special objects of their deserved bounty. And 
we do beseech and intreat them humbly, unto whom we shall repair 
upon this occasion, that they will do the Kinsmans part iu raising up, 
if we may so say, the name of Christ on his inheritance. 

And for their necessary information touching this Work in hand, 
wherein the erecting and supporting of illustrious Schools and Col- 
ledges, adequately answerable to the increase of their Youth and 
Children in New England, is particularly intended; We must, and 
do declare, That all those sums of money, or other Donatives which 
have been given for the furtherance of Preaching to the Indians, are 
applied and appropriated to that Service only ; So that this business 
of advancing University Learning hy illustrious Schools and Golledges, 
hath not had, or ever shall, or can have the allowance of one farthing 
from that liberal Contribution. 

One thing more must be offered to special consideration, namely, 
That all the provision which they have towards this great Undertak- 
ing, is not sufficient, according to a very low and moderate Computa- 
tion, for the twentieth part of those who are born in that Country and 
capable of such Improvement : So greatly hath the Lord been pleased 
to bless his People in those parts with increase of Children. 

In pursuance of what we have proposed, we judg it expedient to 
give some account of that Authority by which we act in this Case, for 
which end we shall recite and extract some particulars, the Original 
whereof is in our custody, and at all times ready to be produced upon 
any just occasion. 

' We the Governor, and General Court of the Massachusets in New 
* England out of the knowledg and confident assurance we have of the 
1 Wisdom, Faithfulness and Sincerity of your selves, hereafter named, 
' together with your natural care aud readiness to promote so Worthy 
'a design; have requested, constituted aud appointed, and by these 
' presents do request, constitute and authorize you Nathaniel Bacon 
1 Esq ; Herbert Pelham, Richard Saltonstal and Henry Ashurst Es- 
' quires ; Mr. William Hook Master of the Savoy, 1 Mr. John Knowlles 

1 In his " Memorials of the Savoy," the Rev. W. J. Loftie states that "After 
the death of Balcanquall [in 1645] in the midst of the civil commotion which 
marked the conclusion of the reign of Charles I., the Savoy seems to have had 
no Master until the Restoration" (p. 144). And in the sketch of Hooke in the 
" Dictionary of National Biography," we read : 

" He is said, without sufficient proof, to have been master of the Savoy, a 
post subsequently filled by his son John . . . ; although it is true that there are 
two letters of Hook in the ' Rawlinson MSS.' at Oxford, written from the Savoy 
and dated 30 Aug. and 19 Oct. 1658 respectively." 

In addition to the two letters mentioned above, there are also two other letters 


'of Bristol, Mr. Thomas Allen of Norwich, Ministers of the Gospel, 

* you and every of you as Trustees, for the raysing and managing of a 
' Revenue in England, towards the education of the youth and children 
' of New England in University Learning ; Giving and hereby granting 

* to you, or any three or more of you, with such gifts as you shall 
1 receave, to purchase Lands, Rents, Reversions, or Annuities to and 

* for the use aforesaid ; and in case of death or removal of any of you 
' the said Trustees, power is hereby given to the rest to elect and con- 
1 stitute one or more in his or their stead ; as also to choose and appoint 
i such Officers under you, as you or any three or more of you shall 
' think necessary : And further to do and act in the Premises as in 
' your wisdome and discretion you shall judg meet : And in testimony 

* hereof, We have hereunto affixed the Seal of our Collony this eleventh 
' day of May, One thousand six hundred fifty and nine. 

The letter 1 of Saltonstall, Ashurst, and Hooke is as follows : 

Right wor ,s our ever Honoured & endeared 

Your letter dated the 20 th of the seventh moneth we h[ave] 
receaved, which occasioneth by us thanksgivings to the Lord, 
for your welfare, & the peace of Gods people with you ; as 
for your sense of our reall & unfeigned willingnesse [to be] 
instrumentall in that great work relating to Univfersity] 
learning. It was the Apostles prajer, that the serv[ice] 
he had for Jerusalem might be accepted of the sai[ 
like in this case wee have desired of the Lord an[ 
we rejoyce, esteming our acceptance with you as [ j 

prajer. For our managem 1 of this undertaking [ 
advantage, wee are very sensible that wee could no[t 
wanted some Instructions which wee have now recea[ved] 
from you in your last ; and to the end wee might ha[ve] 
much more of your helpfullnesse in that kind it wou[ld have] 
been well pleasing to us, that you had not entertain[ed higher] 

written from the Savoy, and dated April 16, 1658, and March 30, 1659. In the 
second of these, Hooke says : "I have beene setled at the Savoy for the space of 
12 moneths, yet holding my relation still to Wh : H. [White Hall], the same as 
in the late Protectours time/' See 4 Massachusetts Historical Collections, vii. 
587-592. This proves that Hooke was living at the Savoy in some capacity. 
The document printed in our text proves that he was believed in Massachusetts 
to have been Master of the Savoy ; and it is hardly likely that the trustees, of 
whom Hooke was himself one, would have allowed this statement to stand in the 
broadside had it not been true. 

1 Massachusetts Archives, lviii. 42, 43. The letter itself is in the hand of a clerk, 
but the signatures are autographs. The manuscript is mutilated, conjectural words 
being placed within brackets. It is given here line for line. 



thoughts of our abilities to serve you, then wee doe [our] 
selves. The inclosed Print will lett you see what [we] 
concluded to make try all of, for a present entrance [to the] 
Trust, which wee have been ready to act in pur[suing more] 
the[n] three moneths agoe ; but the Lord ([ 
no account of his matters) hath sealed up our [ 
all successiue dispensations of his dreadful! displea[sure to] 
the nation ; notwithstanding which we have ad [vised you to] 
try one Argument (as being at snch a time most [ ) ] 

namely, Give a portion to seven & also to eigh[t ; for thou] 
knowest not what evill shall be upon the Ea[rth 1 
among other considerations hath had a pecu[ 
a person of honour (Judge Hill by name) who [ 
truly honorable by his pious and affectionate res[pect for] 
the propagation of the Gospell in both Englands, ther[ 
place & interest ; though he be a Member of parlame[nt and] 
a Justice of the upper Bench. The Lord hath so inlarged [his] 
heart for the furtherance of that great and blessed r[evenue] 
whervvith we are betrusted, that he hath given one th[ousand] 
pounds which will be duly payde (his estate in this [country] 
being by the good hand of God preserved from the violence of 
wicked men.) This thousand pounds is to be kept for a Stock, or 
layd out in Lands, & the Rent therof imployed towards the 
education of youths in University learning with respect to preach- 
ing. And these youths must bee both well inclined ; & of pregnant 
Capacities : as also the children of poore & godly parents (if it may 
bee.) That which Salomon speaks of a seasonable word, How 
beautifull is a word in season, may most truly be applied to a 
work in season ; & if the Circumstances of this good work be con- 
sidered they will not only double the sum above mentioned, but 
much more then double the value of it, being consecrated as an 
offering to the Lord in an houre of temptation & confusion, when 
our work was absolutely at a stand so that in this particular 
]ny of all other men with whom wee have been dea- 
ling (as our Saviour speaks in an other case) wee did not find 
ffaith upon earth. This Guift considered as presidentiall, hath 
a seminall virtue in it, & wee are very much assured it will weigh 
more with persons of Quality (whom we are now prepared to 
attend) then all that can be offered to them under any other 
consideration. Wee shall not any further trespasse at this 
time upon your ocations of more importance, onely giue us leave 
to tell you, that wee joy exceedingly to hear of your zeale and 
faithfullnesse to the Lord in bearing such a signal testimony 

1 Ecclesiastes, xi. 2. 


against the troublers of your peace (that evill generation of 
Quakers) who abound in this Nation, takeing bouldness to blas- 
pheme the name of Christ, his servants & ordinances ; And 
if the Lord should search us with candles (as he did Jerusalem, x 
we beleeve they would be found among the Acans 2 of England. 
Now the Lord who hath recorded his name in the midst of you, 
continve his gracious presence, & his blessing with y u , according 
to his good promise, that they who speak of you may haue cause 
to say, The Lord blesse thee, thou habitation of Justice and 
Mountain of Holinesse. Wee are 

Your very reall friends 

and most willing Servants 

R RD Saltonstall 
H Ashurst 
William Hooke. 

Finally, it is pertinent to quote a brief extract from College 
Book No. Ill, page 30 : 

In the yeare 1659. Richard Saltonstall Esq- being then in England 
sent over for the use of the Colledge in mony, Two hundred & twenty 
pound. & in goods as the cost in England One hundred pound. 3 

I can find no references, except those above, to this in- 
teresting attempt in 1659 to raise funds in England for our 
College. Is it a forced assumption that the trustees wrote a 
second letter, not preserved, and that the entry in College 
Book No. Ill refers to the second letter and to the money sent 
over in response to the " Humble Proposal " ? This is of 
course surmise, but, at all events, in Judge Hill we are appar- 
ently introduced to a hitherto unknown benefactor of Harvard 
College. Roger Hill, born in 1605, was a member of Parlia- 
ment for Bridport in 1645, and a Baron of the Exchequer in 
1657 ; on the restoration of the Long Parliament he resumed 
his seat, and on January 17, 1659-60, he was transferred from 
the Exchequer to the Upper Bench. He died April 21, 1667, 
and was buried in the Temple Church. 4 It is to be noted, also, 
that Judge Hill's gift of £1000 was, with the exception of Sir 

1 The allusion is to Zephaniah, i. 12. 

2 The allusion is to Achan (or Achar), " the troubler of Israel." See 1 Chron- 
icles, ii. 7 ; and Joshua, vii. 1, 24, 25. 

3 The date 1659 is doubtless old style, and so may include March 24, 1659-60. 

4 See the sketch of him, and the authorities there quoted, in the " Dictionary 
of National Biography." 


Matthew Holworthy's bequest in 1681 of equal amount, the 
largest sum that was given to the College in the seventeenth 

There has always been something mysterious about the 
money sent over by Richard Saltonstall in 1659. Writing 
in 1764, Governor Hutchinson, referring to Sir Richard 
Saltonstall, said that " By a will made in 1658, he gave a 
legacy to the college in New England." 1 So far as I know, 
the will of Sir Richard Saltonstall has never been printed. 2 
Yet it has been assumed by Peirce, Quincy, and Eliot, 3 that 
the money sent over by Richard Saltonstall in 1659 was 
part of his father's legacy. It may seem ungracious to throw 
doubt upon this alleged legacy. Yet if the money sent over 
in 1659 by Richard Saltonstall was in reality part of Judge 
Hill's gift, the honor is transferred from the Saltonstall family 
to a near relative. For in 1641 Judge Hill married, for his 
second wife, Abigail, daughter of Brampton and Muriel 
(Sedley) Gurdon, and her sister Muriel Gurdon was the wife 
of Richard Saltonstall. 4 

1 His History of Massachusetts, i. 16, note. 

2 Mr. Richard M. Saltonstall kindly informs me that there is no copy of the 
will among the Saltonstall family papers. 

3 Peirce says : " Richard Saltonstall, ... in 1659, being then in England, 
sent over for the use of the College, in money and goods, the sum of £320. This 
was, probably, the legacy mentioned by Hutchinson as having been given to the 
College in 1658 by his father Sir Richard Saltonstall. It is not clear that this 
£320 was not Sir Richard's legacy. It probably was, and might have been sent 
over by his son ; for no other one is mentioned in the Book of Donations " (His- 
tory of Harvard University, pp. 33, 34). 

Quincy writes : " At his death he [Sir Richard Saltonstall] made a liberal be- 
quest for its support. . . . Subsequently, being in England, he [Richard Salton- 
stall] transmitted three hundred and twenty pounds for its benefit. Whether this 
was a donation of his own, or was his father's legacy, has been made a question. 
It is a point, however, of little consequence. The deed belongs to the honors 
of the name of Saltonstall, emblazoned in every period of our history by its 
public spirit and its private charities" (History of Harvard University, 1840, 
i. 164, 165). 

Eliot, referring to the money and goods sent over in 1659 by Richard Sal- 
tonstall, says : " The currency in which this money was paid cannot be ascer- 
tained. It is supposed to be sterling, from its having been sent from England. 
It has also been supposed — see Peirce and Quincy — that this was in payment 
of his father's legacy to the College " (Sketch of the History of Harvard College, 
p. 163). 

4 Judge Hill's second wife died in 1658. In his will, dated March 6, 1664, 
Hill refers to " my late most honored and beloved wife Mrs. Abigail Hill," and 
to " My brother Richard Saltonstall." See Henry F. Waters, Genealogical 
Gleanings in England, i. 957, 958. 


Remarks were made during the meeting by the President, 
Samuel A. Green, John D. Long, Roger B. Merriman, 
Brooks Adams, James Ford Rhodes, Charles Eliot Nor- 
ton, Gamaliel Bradford, William W. Goodwin, Charles 
R. Codman, William R. Livermore, and Andrew McFar- 
land Davis. 

A new serial number of the Proceedings, containing the 
reports of the October, November, and December meetings, 
was ready for distribution to members. 






Henry Gardner Denny, son of Daniel and Harriet Joanna 
(Gardner) Denny, was born in Boston, June 12, 1833. His 
father was a prominent merchant in that city from 1815 to his 
decease in 1872, and one of the promoters of railway enterprise 
in Massachusetts, being one of the founders of the Boston and 
Worcester Railroad, in conjunction with Nathan Hale and 
others, a project regarded as visionary at the time. Daniel 
Denny was of the Leicester family of that name, established 
there in 1717 by an earlier Daniel Denny (1694-1760), who 
was the first of the family to emigrate from England, where 
they appear to have been settled at Combs in the county of 
Suffolk and to have held land there since 1439 at least. 

Henry G. Denny's mother was a daughter of Dr. Henry 
Gardner of the Harvard class of 1797, son of Henry Gardner 
who represented the town of Stow in the three Provincial 
Congresses of Massachusetts, and who was chosen by the first, 
on October 28, 1774, Receiver General, to supersede the loyal- 
ist Harrison Gray in the collection of Province taxes, an office 
which he held until after the adoption of the State Constitu- 
tion and until his death October 7, 1782. Henry J. Gardner, 
Governor of Massachusetts from 1855 to 1857, was Henry G. 
Denny's uncle. 

Young Denny was sent to the school of Miss Susan D. 
Nickerson on Pearl Street, and in 1841 to the Chauncy Hall 
School, where he was prepared for college. He entered Har- 
vard as freshman and graduated in due course in 1852. He 
then passed the two academical years from 1852 to 1854 in the 
Harvard Law School and at their termination took the degree 
of LL.B. He continued his legal studies for two years more 


in the office of Watts and Peabody, No. 30 Court Street, 
Boston. He was admitted to the Bar in 1856 and opened an 
office at 42 Court Street. His business consisted chiefly in the 
care of property and as executor and trustee. The mere 
enumeration, however, of the different forms of usefulness in 
which he engaged outside of office work gives so impressive 
an idea of his abounding activity that they are here presented 
chronologically under various heads. 

1. Harvard University : 

1856-57, 1857-58, and 1860-61, member of examining committee 

in Rhetoric, Logic, and Grammar. 
1859-60 and 1860-61, member of examining committee on the 
. Library. 

1858, secretary and treasurer of committee of the Alumni to raise 
funds for the Library. 

1862, July 16, elected secretary of the Class of 1852, an office held 

until his death. 
1869, member of the Phi Beta Kappa Society. 
1873, member of the Harvard Musical Association, treasurer 1886, 

librarian 1893. 

2. Town of Dorchester : 

1864, member of School Committee for one year to fill a vacancy. 

3. Hamilton Bank (of which his father was president) : 

1861, a director, also continuously in the Hamilton National Bank 
until its absorption in the Shawmut, also in the Hamilton 
National Bank incorporated in 1898 until it in turn was taken 
into the Fourth National Bank. 

4. Politics : 

1859, December 24, presided over a meeting held in Lyceum Hall, 
Dorchester, in aid of the families of John Brown and of his 

1862, secretary of the Republican Town Committee of Dorchester. 
1868, vice-president of the Grant and Colfax Club of Dorchester. 

5. Social clubs : 

1863 to 1885, member of Orpheus Musical Society of Boston. 

1864 to his death, member of the Examiner Club. 
1863 to 1881, member of the Union Club of Boston. 

6. Literary and scientific societies : 

1864, life member of Boston Society of Natural History. 

1865, member of Dorchester Antiquarian and Historical Society, of 
which he was the last survivor. 

1866, member of the Massachusetts Historical Society, cabinet- 
keeper 1868-1874. 


1868-1872, treasurer of the Christian Register Association. 

1870 to his death, trustee of the Boston Library Society, treasurer 

1871, fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. 
7. Religious and charitable work : 

1862, trustee of the Massachusetts School for Idiots and Feeble- 
minded Youth. 

1865, sent to the Armies of the Potomac and James as agent of the 
American Unitarian Association. 

1868, delegate to the National Unitarian Conference at New York 
to represent the Christian Register Association. 

1869-1880, treasurer of the Home for Aged and Indigent Females. 

1876-1902, treasurer of Society for Promotion of Theological 

1883, member of executive committee of Suffolk Conference of 
Unitarian and other Churches. 

Mr. Denny lived in his father's family until the death of his 
father in 1872, and with his mother during her life for three 
years thereafter. The family moved to Savin Hill, Dorchester, 
in 1848, and at the age of twenty-one Mr. Denny became a 
legal voter in that town. He changed his residence to Boston 
in 1868. He always took much interest in the affairs of Dor- 
chester, where his grandfather, Dr. Gardner, possessed a large 

He wrote a beautifully neat and clear hand himself, and in 
his library there was a large and rare volume of copper-plate 
specimens of the old-fashioned eighteenth century round hand. 
His dissatisfaction with the penmanship then taught in the 
schools is said to have induced him to invite to this country 
an English writing-master in order to improve it. 

It was a surprise to those who knew Mr. Denny only later 
in his life, to learn that he had been a thorough-going Garri- 
sonian Abolitionist, for he exhibited few of the qualities com- 
monly attributed to that party. We are told that he was a 
member of some sort of an association for the protection of 
abolition orators from violence. Nothing ever happened to 
change his view that the abolitionists had been right first, last, 
and always; and the fact of his presiding at a meeting in 
December, 1859, in aid of the families of John Brown and his 
associates, shows that his zeal reached the high-water mark. 

Mr. Denny was an enthusiastic book lover. The mere pres- 


ence of books, he would say, gave him pleasure. He collected 
a fine library containing much that was rare and curious, in- 
cluding the first four folios of Shakespeare. This collection 
was sold by auction in 1906. It had been somewhat damaged 
by water in 1904. 

Mr. Denny was stiff in his opinion not only as to the merits 
of the abolitionists, but as to almost every other subject on 
which he had occasion to form a judgment ; and naturally he 
was sometimes in the wrong. He took great interest in the 
subject of correct English, and must have acquired some repu- 
tation as a proficient in that department to have been placed 
so soon after graduation as in 1856 on an Examining Com- 
mittee by the college authorities. He had standards of his 
own, however, and was unwilling to accept the de facto test of 
usage, but set up some de jure rule according to which a thing- 
might be right which nobody but himself thought so. But 
although impervious to an opposing argument, he did not allow 
his own views to affect his conduct where there was useful 
work to be done which had to be done by some one. The 
writer saw him most frequently in relation to the affairs of the 
Boston Library Society, of which he was the treasurer and 
practically the executive manager for eleven years, and as 
such assiduously busy with no corresponding pecuniary com- 
pensation. He was master of the details of library work, in- 
dexing, and card catalogues, classification of books, and the 
statistics of circulation. His conduct in regard to the sale of 
the house on Boylston Place, the purchase of the building on 
Newbury Street, and the removal of the library to the latter 
place, was characteristic and much to his credit. The building 
on Bojdston Place was becoming more and more inconvenient 
when an opportunity to sell it at a price considerably above 
the assessed value occurred, owing to a contemplated improve- 
ment of an adjoining estate. Mr. Denny thought that by 
holding out more could be obtained. After prolonging the 
negotiations a point was reached which satisfied all the trus- 
tees but himself, and he was not disposed to yield an inch. 
A meeting of the proprietors was called, and notwithstanding 
a carefully prepared argument by him, illustrated by a plan, 
the vote of the meeting was against him. Under such circum- 
stances many an official would have washed his hands of the 
whole bad business and left it to be worked out by others. 



But the thing was settled, and now the more difficult task of 
effecting a removal presented itself. The prospect of useful 
work before him seemed to stimulate all Mr. Denny's energies, 
and, forgetting the things which were behind, he threw himself 
into the very serious business of contracting for and supervis- 
ing the extensive alterations and additions in the Newbury 
Street house, of transporting a library of some forty thousand 
volumes thither, and all within the time agreed upon with the 
purchaser of the old building, — a feat which, owing to the usual 
vexatious delays that such work encounters, seemed almost 
impossible to his associates. 

Mr. Denny had, if the expression may be allowed, the 
enthusiasm of his environment. He took an interest in all 
familiar things connected with home and kindred, with old 
Dorchester and old Boston, with Harvard College and his 
classmates. As class secretary he was always on the watch 
for any scraps of information to be gleaned from newspapers or 
otherwise, and he collected a large amount of Harvardiana, 
which was withdrawn from the sale when the rest of his 
library passed under the hammer and will be disposed of 

Mr. Denny enjoyed sociability and hospitality and the 
arrangement of dinners, of class dinners and the dinners of the 
Harvard Musical Association ; and it may be mentioned here 
that, without being addicted to the least excess, he excelled 
in dinner-giving himself, and was learned in the literature of 
the cuisine. His purchase of cook-books for the Boston 
Library Society sometimes provoked a smile. 

Although undemonstrative in his manner, and sometimes 
querulous and antagonistic in his attitude, something would 
now and then occur to show his steady attachment to old 
friends and to old familiar faces, and his real consideration for 
the interests of those in any way dependent on him. 

His last days were burdened by the weight of increasing 
infirmities, failing eyesight, and crippled locomotion, which 
kept him confined to the house for a year preceding his 
decease, which took place on September 19, 1907, at a private 
hospital in Roxbury, whither he had been removed a week 
before. He was never married. 



The stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 13th instant, 
at three o'clock, p.m.; the President in the chair. 

The record of the January meeting was read and approved. 

The Librarian, in making his usual report, called attention 
to a letter, 1 dated January 9, 1794, written by James Sullivan, 
at that time President of the Society, given by Miss Mary 
Bigelow, daughter of our associate the late Dr. Jacob Bigelow. 
It relates to the gift, by the owners of the Tontine Crescent, 
of the fee of a large room in the upper story of that building, 
which the Society used for thirty-nine years, until June, 1833. 

The Cabinet-Keeper reported the gift, by George Eliot 
Richardson, of a large number of bills on banks in New 
England, between the years 1849 and 1864, which are stamped 
either counterfeit or worthless, and a bill of the Confed- 
erate States issued in 1864. He also reported the gift, by 
F. B. Sanborn, of a photograph of what is said to be the only 
known portrait of Colonel James Montgomery, who died at 
Mound City, Kansas, on December 6, 1871. 

The Librarian, in the absence of the Corresponding Secre- 
tary, said that letters had been received from Frederic Win- 
throp, of Hamilton, and John B. Bury, of Kings College, 
Cambridge, England, respectively accepting their elections 
to the Resident and Corresponding membership; and that a 
letter had also been received from Henry Adams, in acknowl- 
edgment of the transfer of his name to the Honorary roll, ex- 
pressing his high appreciation of the honor. 

Robert S. Rantoul, of Salem, was elected a Resident 
Member, and Rafael Altamira y Crevea, of the University of 
Oviedo, Spain, a Corresponding Member. 

The President then said : 

At the last meeting of the Society, it will be remembered, 
a new name, that of Henry Adams, was placed upon our Hon- 

1 Printed in 1 Proceedings, i. 58, 59. 


orary roll. After this action bad been taken, it occurred to 
me, upon reflection, that, because of lack of precedents, the 
course pursued had been, to say the least, in some respects 
irregular. For this I, as presiding officer, was responsible. 
It will be remembered that, in accordance with an under- 
standing reached at the April meeting 1 of 1901, no direct 
nomination of any person to be balloted upon to fill a vacancy 
in the Honorary list was thereafter to be made by the 
Council. It was by unanimous consent agreed that, instead 
of making such specific nomination, the Council thereafter 
would, in case of a vacancy in the Honorary list, submit cer- 
tain names which seemed proper for consideration to the 
Society at large, and, after due deliberation, a ballot, informal 
in character, might then be taken. If, as the result of that 
ballot, it was seen that opinion concentrated upon any name, 
the matter could be referred back to the Council, who would 
report the name of the person agreed upon for formal action 
in the usual way at a subsequent meeting. 

In the case of the vacancy referred to, occasioned by the 
death of Dr. Masson, it will also be remembered, the Council 
had suggested the name of Count Leo Tolstoy. At the last 
meeting additional names were suggested ; and, after discus- 
sion, an informal ballot was taken by unanimous consent. 
It was found that, of the thirty-two votes cast, thirty-one 
favored Henry Adams. Thereupon, the expression of opinion 
being practically unanimous, Mr. Adams was declared duly 
elected an Honorary Member. It has, however, heretofore 
been the practice when, as in the case of Mr. Adams, any 
person selected to be placed on the Honorary list was already 
a Corresponding Member of the Society, to vote that his 
name be merely transferred from one roll to the other, — from 
the Corresponding to the Honorary list; for it is somewhat 
difficult to see how a person already a member of the Society 
can again, without ceasing to be a member, be elected into 
it; and those whose names are on any of our rolls, whether 
Resident, Corresponding or Honorary, are all unquestionably 
members of the Society. It therefore, on reflection, seemed 
to me that, as presiding officer, I had acted without full con- 
sideration in declaring Mr. Henry Adams, as the result of a 
vote so taken, a duly elected Honorary Member, especially in 
1 2 Proceedings, xv. 54. 


view of the fact that, by Article 4, Chapter I, of the By-Laws, 
it is provided that, in balloting for members, " the law and 
custom of our forefathers shall be observed, by taking the 
question with Indian corn and beans ; the corn expressing 
yeas, and the beans nays" 

The thing is, perhaps, of no great consequence, and the 
irregularity in the case of Mr. Adams is immaterial. Never- 
theless, as President of the Society, in view of similar contin- 
gencies which may hereafter arise, I propose to lay down a 
rule which, unless otherwise ordered, will remain in force at 
least as long as I continue to be President. 

The custom I would therefore recommend, and unless 
otherwise ordered shall carry into effect, will be that, in the 
case of a vacancy in the Honorary list, the Council shall sub- 
mit the names of those historians or investigators who seem 
to it to be most worthy of consideration. These names, as 
well as others which may be suggested, can be discussed ; and 
an informal ballot then taken, in accordance with the under- 
standing reached at the meeting of April, 1901. If the name 
of a person not on our lists should be agreed upon, it will be 
referred back to the Council, to be duly reported by the 
Council and acted upon in the way prescribed in the By-Laws. 
If, however, as is more usually the case, and as was the case 
at the last meeting, a Corresponding Member is selected for 
transfer to the Honorary roll, the first question to be submitted 
will be on a motion that the name of the person thus selected, 
being that of one already a member of the Society, be trans- 
ferred from the Corresponding to the Honorary list. Should 
this transfer be unanimously ordered, it will take effect; and 
the acceptance of the transfer by the person named will have 
the force of a resignation, creating a vacancy in the Corre- 
sponding list. Should, however, objection be made to the 
transfer, the matter will be referred back to the Council, and 
acted upon in the way prescribed in the By-Laws ; and, if the 
person thus named be subsequently elected an Honorary 
Member, his election as such will be construed as working 
a vacancy in the Corresponding list. 

The point involved is simply that a person already a mem- 
ber will not in future be elected again a member; but, if no 
objection is made, his name will be transferred from one roll 
to the other. Should, however, objection to such transfer be 


made, the name in question, or some other, will be regularly 
reported in the way prescribed in Article 2, Chapter I, of the 
By-Laws, and formally balloted upon in the way prescribed in 
Article 4, Chapter I. 

The contingency, however, is one not contemplated when 
the By-Laws were framed, nor provided for in them. It is due 
to the new significance given to the Honorary list, and the 
care taken in selection of those whose names are placed upon 
it. 1 Reflection on the matter further led me since the last 
meeting into an examination of the By-Laws of the Society as 
now in force, and it became at once obvious that they stand 
in need of careful revision and re-enactment. Originally 
drafted in 1873 2 and revised in 1881, 3 they were seven 
years later, in 1888, again revised, certain amendments recom- 
mended, and the present code adopted. 4 This, the last re- 
vision, was twenty years ago. During the intervening period 
many, and very important, amendments and changes have been 
from time to time made, while usages and understandings 
have grown up, or been reached, which have the effect of law, 
but which have never been reduced to form. Under these 
circumstances a new revision has been proposed, and the 
Council now has it under consideration. A printed draft, 
showing the changes which have been made since 1888, and 
the amendments necessary to incorporate the usages and under- 
standings since then adopted or reached, will be submitted at 
the next (March) meeting of the Society. And, by direction 
of the Council, notice is now given, so that the matter may 
finally be acted upon in accordance with Article 3, Chapter 
II, of the present By-Laws at the Annual Meeting in April. 

The President proceeded : 

I regret to announce a fresh vacancy in our Resident roll 
since the last meeting of the Society. Edward Henry Strobel 
died at Bangkok, Siam, on the 15th January. 

Elected a Resident Member on the 9th January, 1902, the 
connection of Dr. Strobel with the Society had been hardly 

i 2 Proceedings, x. 326 ; xv. 51-54. 
2 1 Proceedings, xiii. 114, 139-150. 
8 Ibid. xix. 182-193. 
* 2 Proceedings, iv. 120-123, 222-235. 

1908.] Lincoln's offer to garibaldi. 319 

more than nominal. Most properly chosen in recognition of 
distinguished services rendered and results accomplished in 
the field of international law, he was present at the two meet- 
ings, in February and March, 1902, immediately succeeding 
his election. He went abroad immediately after that as offi- 
cial adviser of the King of Siam, designated for that duty by 
eminent Americans, peculiarly qualified to make a proper 

Dr. Strobel, therefore, never took part in the discussions of 
the Society, nor did he communicate anything to our " Pro- 
ceedings." He, of course, never served on any committee. 
His name was upon our roll six years only ; and, at the time 
of his death, he stood sixty-fifth in the order of seniority. I 
shall ask his friend and associate Archibald C. Coolidge to 
pay tribute to him. 

Archibald Cary Coolidge then gave an account of the 
recent history of Siam, and spoke of the important service 
rendered to the government and later to the King, by Dr. 
Strobel, especially as to the relations of Siam with France. 
He paid a warm tribute to him, as having done much, through 
his high legal ability, his thorough knowledge of international 
law, and his tactful methods, toward preserving the integrity 
of the kingdom. 

Lindsay Swift was appointed to prepare a memoir of 
Dr. Strobel to be printed in the Proceedings. 

C. F. Adams submitted the following paper: 

At a recent meeting of an Historical Congress held at Pe- 
rugia, Italy, in September, Mr. H. Nelson Gay, an American 
now resident in Rome, submitted an interesting paper, being a 
part of a work upon which he is engaged, entitled " Le rela- 
zioni fra l'ltalia e gli Stati Uniti." This paper was based 
upon original material which Mr. Gay had unearthed in the 
archives of the American legation at Brussels, and related to 
an offer of a high command in the Army of the United States 
made to Garibaldi during the summer of 1861, shortly after 
the disgraceful rout known as the first Battle of Bull Run. 
Henry Shelton Sanford, of Connecticut, was then the United 
States Minister at Brussels, and the material in question was 
part of Mr. Sanford's official correspondence. 


Subsequently Mr. Gay put this material into the form of a 
paper entitled "Lincoln's Offer of a Command to Garibaldi 
light on a disputed point of history," which appeared in the 
last November (1907) issue of " The Century Magazine." 1 He 
there gives the history of this offer which, now forgotten, at 
the time caused some discussion ; but the details connected 
with it are now for the first time revealed. It will be re- 
membered that Garibaldi, in 1861, was living in retirement. 
The present kingdom of Italy, under the rule of Victor Em- 
manuel, had been brought into existence as the result of the 
operations in which Garibaldi had taken so famous and promi- 
nent a part in the summer of 1860, but did not yet include the 
Papal temporality. The seat of government of the newly 
united Italy had been established at Turin ; but Garibaldi 
was looking forward to the occupation of Rome as the capital 
of the kingdom. His fame was, of course, world-wide. Mr. 
Gay now makes public a correspondence which passed at 
the time, and in which Mr. Sanford took a prominent part. As 
is well known, nothing resulted from the most ill-considered 
move to which it relates ; but none the less it has an histori- 
cal interest, and moreover it conveys a lesson. The corre- 
spondence took place during the earlier months of my father's 
seven years of diplomatic service in England, he having reached 
London during the previous May. He knew nothing of it un- 
til it was over ; but I find in his diary the following long entry, 
under date of Friday, September 20, 1861, which has a cer- 
tain significance in connection with Mr. Gay's article in the 
November " Century." I reproduce it in full : 

Had visits also from Mr. Sanford and Mr. Motley, both of whom 
came to dine with me. The former seemed very anxious to explain to 
both of us his agency in the invitation extended to Garibaldi to go to 
America. This matter has given occasion to a good deal of unpleasant 
remark in Europe, as indicating that we did not feel competent to 
manage our business, with our own officers. I had been consulted 
about it by Mr. Lucas, who wished authority to contradict it, which I 
could riot give him excepting in so far as the story affirmed that the 
supreme command had been offered to [Garibaldi]. I gave him on 
Tuesday my version of the matter, which was this. That probably 
some irresponsible individual had first sounded [Garibaldi] as to his 

i lxxv. (No. 1), 63-74. • 

1908.] Lincoln's offer to garibaldi. 321 

disposition to go. Then that the government on receiving information 
of this had authorized an offer of a command : — That Garibaldi had 
demanded a general power, which could not be admitted, and the nego- 
tiation had gone off on this issue. My conjecture proved in the main 
correct, though there were material additions in the narrative of Mr. 
Sanford. It seems that one James W. Quiggle, officiating as consul at 
Antwerp, some time since whilst travelling in Italy made acquaintance 
enough with Garibaldi to induce him to volunteer a letter of enquiry as 
to his feeling on the American question. The reply was of such a kind 
as to induce Mr. Quiggle to send a copy to the Department of State. 
This had brought a letter of instructions to Mr. Sanford to go and 
make Garibaldi an offer of a position of Major General, being the high- 
est army rank in the gift of the President. At the same time it eulo- 
gized Mr. Quiggle, and directed Mr. Sanford to offer him any place 
under the General that he might prefer. Sanford, professing to be well 
aware of the responsibility resting on him, and desirous of keeping the 
control of the matter in his hands, yet posts off first of all to Mr. 
Quiggle and reads him the instruction as well as the compliment to 
himself. Quiggle insists upon seeing and reading it, is cunning enough 
to take a copy, and then on the strength of it anticipated poor Sanford 
by writing at once to Garibaldi to appraise him that the government 
had forwarded him a formal invitation to take the supreme command in 
America, of which he would receive due notice presently. Finding 
this misconception fastened on the mind of Garibaldi by this folly of 
his own, his next task was to remedy the evil in the best way he could. 
Accordingly he goes to Turin, where he finds a friend of Garibaldi who 
has come from him to notify the King of Sardinia that he is ready to go 
to America if his services are not wanted in Italy. In other words, he 
threatens to withdraw the aid of his popularity to the King if he refuses 
to advance forthwith upon Rome. The King is too wary to be drawn 
into the trap ; so, with great professions of good will, reluctantly grants 
his consent to the chief's departure. It follows that Garibaldi mortified 
at the failure of his scheme has no resource but to execute his threat. 
But here again Mr. Sanford is compelled to intervene to protect the 
American Government from the effects of Garibaldi's misconception. 
To that end he pays him a visit and discloses to him the fact that he 
can have a command, but not the supreme control. This of course 
changes his views again. He cannot think of going to America with- 
out having the power of a Dictator, and the contingent right to pro- 
claim emancipation to the slaves. On this point the negotiation went 
off. A strange medley of blunders. Garibaldi however felt so awk- 
wardly placed by his failure to carry the King off his feet, that he still 
clung to the idea of paying a visit to America as a private citizen. 
Mr. Sanford offered him every facility to go out as a guest, but he 



declined it all, and finished by saying that if he decided to go it should 
be in his own way. This seems to me a lucky escape ; for our 
officers have too much sense of honor not to feel that the introduction 
of a foreigner to do their work is a lasting discredit to themselves. At 
best it is little more than a clap-trap. Mr. Seward is unquestionably a 
statesman of large and comprehensive views, but in his management of 
his office he betrays two defects. One a want of systematic and digni- 
fied operation in the opinion of the world — the other, an admixture of 
that earthly taint which comes from early training in the school of New 
York State politics. The first shows itself in a somewhat brusque and 
ungracious manner towards the representatives of foreign nations. The 
second, in a rather indiscriminate appliance of means to ends. Mr. 
Sanfbrd evidently felt that he had not gained much in this melee, but 
I made no remark beyond expressing a fear of the effect upon Generals 
Scott and McClellan. 

This distinctly humiliating foot-note, for it amounts to that, 
in the early history of our War of Secession, is curiously 
suggestive of a very similar episode which had occurred some 
eighty years before, during the progress of our War of Inde- 
pendence. My attention has been recently drawn to the 
similarity of the experiences while reading Sir George Otto 
Trevelyan's last volume of his work entitled " The American 

Sir George, in there recounting the operations of the third 
year (1778) of the war, refers to the strange antics of Silas 
Deane, then established at Paris in the anomalous position 
described as u business agent of the Revolutionary govern- 
ment." " Silas Deane, with ineffable folly," Sir George pro- 
ceeds to remind us, " was at this time [1778] scheming to get 
the Commander-in-Chief of the American army superseded, 
and his functions transferred to the Comte de Broglie, — a 
restless, and not very successful, diplomatist, and a fifth-rate 
general." 1 " Mr. Deane's mad contract with Monsieur du 
Coudray and his hundred officers " is also referred to, 2 and the 
fact that a wretched French adventurer, as ignorant of both 
American conditions and character as of the English language, 
was actually contracted with on terms which would have led 
to his superseding General Knox in command of Washington's 
artillery. Naturally, such an appointment led to a tender of 

1 G. 0. Trevelyan, The American Revolution, Part iii. (New York, 1907), 42. 

2 Ibid. 40. 


resignation on the part of Greene, Knox and Sullivan, who 
all found themselves outranked and felt humiliated. And so 
in 1861 history repeated itself, the earlier page of 1778 being 
quite forgotten; though it is only fair to bear in mind the 
fact, in a degree redeeming, that Garibaldi was not a Comte 
de Broglie, nor Sanford a Silas Deane. Even this much, 
however, cannot be said of the personage designated as "one 
James W. Quiggle, officiating [in 1861] as consul at Ant- 
werp." But, no matter how charitably viewed, the more 
recent episode of the two, seen through the perspective of 
nearly half a century, is, it must be conceded, far from 
being in strict accordance with a proper sense of national 

The two incidents, separated by more than three-fourths 
of a century, are, indeed, suggestive of a certain element 
of provincialism and lack of self-confidence, so to speak, 
paradoxical as it sounds, in the American people. We seem 
never to have quite got over the colonial, or rather the provin- 
cial, feeling that, somehow or in some way, the old countries 
of Europe contain material of which we ourselves are more 
or less barren. For instance, in "The Boston Herald" for 
Tuesday of this very week, February 11, there is an editorial 
entitled " A Prophet and his Prophecy." In this article a 
" distinguished French journalist" now visiting this country — 
whose name, however, does not appear — is quoted as saying 
that, in -case of a war between Japan and this country, as the 
result of earlier successes on the part of the Asiatic nation, 
44 American money will be inducing soldiers of fortune from 
all lands to join the forces of the United States. Then the 
United States will win." The quotation is suggestive of that 
most illuminating paper of the late James Russell Lowell, 
written in 1869, shortly after the close of our War of Seces- 
sion, entitled " On a Certain Condescension in Foreigners." 
That condescension we seem actually through both the 
eighteenth and nineteenth centuries to have gone out to 
seek. We invited it ; and at no time in our history do we 
seem to have been more prone to this tacit self-confession of 
foreign superiority than during the years which immediately 
preceded the War of Secession. As Mr. Lowell, writing in 
1869, 1 says: 

1 J. R. Lowell, My Study Windows (Boston, 1885), 76, 77. 


Before our war we were to Europe but a huge mob of adventurers 
and shop-keepers. Leigh Hunt expressed it well enough when he said 
that he could never think of America without seeing a gigantic counter 
stretched all along the seaboard. 

Mr. Lowell then goes on : 

Democracy had been hitherto only a ludicrous effort to reverse the 
laws of nature by thrusting Cleon into the place of Pericles. But a 
democracy that could fight for an abstraction, whose members held life 
and goods cheap compared with that larger life which we call country, 
was not merely unheard-of, but portentous. 

None the less, Mr. Gay's paper in " The Century Magazine " 
reminds us how in the early stages of that struggle we adver- 
tised to the world through our highest officials — the Presi- 
dent and Secretary of State — our lack of self-confidence, and 
went forth to invite a manifestation of " condescension in for- 
eigners." But it is curious now to consider what might have 
occurred had the offer to Garibaldi been accepted. At best, 
from a military point of view, a daring partisan leader, the 
probabilities are great that the liberator of the two Sicilies 
would have sustained a lamentable loss of prestige. 

He, it is true, was exceptional ; but in the " Reminiscences " 
of Carl Schurz, recently published, there is a most suggestive 
passage bearing upon these foreign military adventurers taken 
as a whole, — "soldiers of fortune," as they were called,- — 
who came under Mr. Schurz's own observation. He says 
that, after his return (1862) from his mission to Spain, and 
when he had himself been offered a brigadier-generalship in 
our army by President Lincoln : 

While I was waiting in Washington for my confirmation and assign- 
ment, I had again to undergo the tribulations of persons who are sup- 
posed to be men of "influence." The news had gone abroad that in 
America there was a great demand for officers of military training and 
experience. This demand could not fail to attract from all parts of the 
globe adventurous characters who had, or pretended to have, seen mili- 
tary service in one country or another, and who believed that there was 
a chance for prompt employment and rapid promotion, Washington at 
that period fairly swarmed with them. Some were very respectable 
persons, who came here well recommended, and subsequently made a 
praiseworthy record. Others belonged to the class of adventurers who 
traded on their good looks or on the fine stories they had concocted of 
their own virtues and achievements [ii. 338]. 


Mr. Schurz then goes on to specify instances : 

A young man, calling himself Count von Schweinitz, presented him- 
self to me neatly attired in the uniform of an Austrian officer of Uhlans. 
He was very glib of tongue, and exhibited papers which had an 
authentic look, and seemed to sustain his pretensions. But there were 
occasional smartnesses in his conversation which made me suspicious. 
He may have noticed that I hesitated to trust him, for suddenly he 
ceased to press me with his suit. I learned afterwards that he had 
succeeded in obtaining some appointment, and also in borrowing con- 
siderable sums of money from two foreign Ministers. Finally it turned 
out that his mother was a washerwoman, that he had served an 
Austrian officer of Uhlans as a valet, and that as such he had possessed 
himself of his uniform and his master's papers [ii. 339]. 

Recalling these somewhat unsavory reminiscences, it is not 
without interest to ask ourselves whether this state of affairs 
will ever wholly cease to be : whether the time will at last in- 
deed come when we Americans will look upon the older Euro- 
pean nations as otherwise than in some way superior ; or, on 
the other hand, whether those nations will ever approach us 
without a certain sense of that condescension of the foreigner 
upon which Mr. Lowell animadverted half a century ago. At 
present it seems to have assumed a most unsavory phase, but 
one which is perhaps the natural result of the rapid accumula- 
tion of vast wealth in the hands of the self-made individual, — 
the purchase of titles, always encumbered by a man, by 
American young women, or for American young women by their 
families, who wish in this way to identify themselves with an 
aristocracy. It is, in fact, difficult to-day to take up a newspaper 
without coming across a reference to such cases, usually in the 
divorce courts, — an Italian prince, an English duke or earl, 
or a French count, more or less, as the evidence shows, a de- 
generate, married to a rich Americaness. It is the same old 
weakness ; but, whether studied in the pages of Trevelyan, in 
Mr. Gay's paper, or in the scandal-mongering columns of 
to-day's society journals, it is not inspiring ; and I confess to a 
certain sense of satisfaction in thus putting on record the evi- 
dence that, with sturdy Americanism, Mr. Adams, when he 
heard of the Se ward-Garibaldi incident of 1861, saw the thing 
in its true light, and most properly, as well as correctly, char- 
acterized it. 


Josiah P. Qutncy, in presenting the letters given below, 
said : 

A short time ago I brought here a letter from Governor 
Wise of Virginia bearing upon the execution of John Brown. 
I found that letter by accident and did not know how it came 
into my possession. Since then other letters have come to 
light which seem to go with it. They were undoubtedly 
brought home by my brother, General Samuel M. Quincy, 
while serving as captain of a company of the Second Massa- 
chusetts Infantry. They appear to have come into his hands 
from among the papers and documents belonging to the 
Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Virginia. It will be re- 
membered that, after his capture at Harper's Ferry, John 
Brown was taken to Charlestown, the Jefferson County-seat, 
some ten miles west from the Ferry, there confined, and sub- 
sequently tried and executed. When, in the latter days of 
February, 1862, the winter camps were broken up and mili- 
tary operations began, the Second Massachusetts Infantry 
was a portion of the army of the Shenandoah under command 
of Major-General Nathaniel P. Banks. Crossing the Potomac 
at Harper's Ferry on the 27th of February, this regiment was 
marched to Charlestown, and certain of its companies were 
quartered in the Court-house. 1 It was there undoubtedly that 
Captain Quincy got the letters to which I have referred. 
They were probably found in the office of the prosecuting 
attorney. In reading the letters it is due to Governor Wise 
to say that the pungent expressions he sometimes uses were 
natural to his position as Executive of a State at a time of 
great excitement. He is better represented by the kindly 
letter he addressed to the wife of John Brown, as well as 
by the words which conclude Mr. Chamberlin's memoir of 
the guerilla fighter who was largely instrumental in giving 
Kansas to the Union as a free State. They were addressed 
by Governor Wise to a Union officer: " John Brown was a 
great man, sir; he was a great man." 

It is a commonplace to say that the consequences of a given 
action can never be estimated by those contemporary with it. 
And it may be added that the results must be very imperfectly 
discerned by a generation separated from it by an interval of 

1 A. H. Quint, Record of the Second Massachusetts Infantry, 68. 



busy years. There is no analytical process by which we can 
apportion to Brown's attempt to free slaves in Virginia its 
share in shaping the events and policies that succeeded it. 
His was a rough and ready response to the highest national 
ideals then in the air. Now there is this trouble with the 
exalted ideals which so often break out in our stimulating 
climate ; they are quite as apt to take men out of action as 
to thrust them into it. The idealist who is over-careful to 
make no mistakes may die in the good esteem of the world, 
—or rather of that petty fraction of it which knows anything 
about him. But the impulsive idealist — who risks mistakes, 
and in Shakespeare's striking phrase " makes mouths at the 
invisible event " — becomes a distinct and often a beneficent 
factor in history. The world may be greatly indebted to the 
man who dares even when the co-operative events which he 
expected do not come to pass. " There would be no heroism 
in the world," said President Eliot in a recent address, "if the 
hero were not uncertain of the issue." And again we get 
this with Shakespeare's peculiar emphasis when he makes 
" thinking too precisely of the event a thought, which quar- 
tered, hath but one part wisdom and ever three parts coward." 

There is the case of Captain Wilkes when he took Mason 
and Slidell from a British ship. From the point of view of 
the international statute book, no less than from that of a 
cautious expediency, it was a blunder. Yet those who can 
remember the burst of patriotic enthusiasm which that act 
awakened throughout the North will hesitate to say that the 
stream of history would have run clearer without it. For it 
focussed opinions which were even then somewhat floating 
and undefined. It furnished concrete expression to the feeling 
that any effort to defend the Union against organized forces 
of aggression — however wanting in prudence — was ethically 
and eternally right. And so the Congressional vote of thanks 
to Captain Wilkes was but the crest of the wave of popular 
belief that somehow good must come from his vigorous act. 

In considering the events that make up history, we fix upon 
some link in the chain of sequences and ask what would have 
happened had another been forged to fill its place. And so 
I am sometimes tempted to drift into a fruitless speculation 
as to what might have been if, at an early stage of the civil 
war, it had been authoritatively declared that aggression in 


the interest of slavery must be met by its abolition. Suppose 
the President had heeded the fervent petition of Horace 
Greeley to this effect — a petition that was supported by 
many stronger men than Mr. Greeley ! What would have 
resulted had the President abstained from nullifying the 
emancipation proclamation of Fre'mont in his Western Depart- 
ment? One evil we may safely say would have been pre- 
vented. We should have been free from that European 
sympathy with the Confederacy which did so much to prolong 
the war. Napoleon III and the British aristocracy never 
would have dared to express sympathy if the avowed conten- 
tion had been whether slavery should be strengthened or put 
to an end. How far this would have been offset by dissatis- 
faction in the border States and by disregard of the limitation 
of the war powers, as interpreted by Mr. Benjamin R. Curtis 
and others, we can never know. 

In like manner it is impossible to determine with any exact- 
ness how far such good as we have attained can be credited 
to John Brown's heroic attack upon slavery. Personally, I 
place a high value upon it. For the maturing of thought 
and its translation into action is always advanced through 
sympathy with a man. All history shows the power of a 
visible symbol in directing the wandering attention of the 
masses. Every great movement awaits its typical hero, and 
he is nearer to average humanity if he is not without indis- 
cretions. An immediate result of the attack at Harper's Ferry 
is certainly evident. It is known that after the repeal of the 
Missouri Compromise an agitation for the unrestricted impor- 
tation of African labor was gathering force in the South. But 
the action of John Brown, and the sympathy that went out 
to him, compelled the conviction that the Slave States had 
better devote attention to keeping such labor as they had to 
the exclusion of plans for obtaining any more. Here is a re- 
sult which may be accepted with assurance, even if many more 
important ones must remain in the cloud-land of conjecture. 

I believe there is some copy-book maxim which warns us 
to avoid extremes; but in the view of what the Germans call 
the World Spirit extremes may be just what we need. They 
give salutary emphasis to the comfortable speculations of the 
easy-chair. Emerson recognized this when, referring to the 
execution of Brown, he ventured upon a comparison whose 


challenge to attention was in inverse ratio to its taste. It 
was recognized in that stirring song of the Union troops which 
declared that the soul of John Brown — the spirit which ani- 
mated him — was marching on. Yes; and it must continue 
to do so, for he has affixed his homely name to one of the 
most important epochs in his country's history. 

A. E. Peticolas to Andrew Hunter. 

Richmond, Nov. 1, 1859 
Dear Sir, — We desire if Brown and his coadjutors are executed 
to add their heads to the collection in our museum. If the transfer- 
ence of the bodies will not exceed a cost of five dollars each we should 
also be glad to have them. 

This request will of course not interfere with any clemency which it 
may be found desirable to extend to those convicted. Attention to this 
request will confer a great favor. 

A. E. Peticolas M. D. 
Prof Anat at Med. 
College of Va. 
Mr. Andrew Hunter 

Henry A. Wise to Andrew Hunter. 

Richmond, V* Nov? 2°4 1859. 

D R Sir, — We have just got [John E.] Cook's description of the fugi- 
tives, Owen Brown, [Francis Jackson] Meriam, [Charles Plummer] 
Tidd & a [Barclay] Coppoc. No affidavits. Do send on the affidavits 
necessary for requisition. 

The Medical faculty of Richmond College ask for the bodies of such 
as may be executed. The Court may order the bodies to be given over 
to surgeons. See to that in the sentence. It will not interfere with 
the pardoning power. And any who are hung ought not to have burial 
in V\ 

Yrs truly Henry A. Wise 

A. Hunter, Esq r 

Richmond, V* Nov? 6^ 1859. 
My dear Sir, — Rec? your last this m?, inclosing Cook's affidavit. 
Better try Cook in your Court & turn [Aaron D.J Stevens over to 
Dis* C' of the U. S. But he may die & defeat ends of so turning him 
over. Cook is the worst of all these villains. I wish you to under- 
stand confidentially, that I will not reprieve or pardon one man now 
after the letters I have rec d from the North. And as it may seem too 
severe for fair trial to put Stevens at bar let him be turned over. 



Be prompt to send me affidavits for any party discovered to be im- 
plicated for whom requisition is to be made. Our men Moore & Kelly 
have been kept waiting for Cook's affidavit. 

Cant you get an indictment against Gerritt Smith and Fred: Doug- 
las, or some one of the leading prompters in Canada or our Northern 
States ? If so, send it to me immediately upon getting it, or as early 
as you can get an affidavit. Fred : Douglas' letter avows his part in 
the plot, acting in N. Y., and says he has violated the jurisdiction of 
that State, if any. He means he was there when he advised & coun- 
selled this invasion. No matter where he was ; if he incited or aided 
& abetted insurrection here, he violated our laws, and may be de- 
manded of England or any of the U. States. 

Yrs truly 

Henry A. Wise. 

Have my amanuenses for you attend to the inclosed letters. 

Ruth Thompson to John Brown. 

North Elba, Nov. 27$ 1859 
My Dearly beloved Father, — I must write a word to you 
although it may never reach you. We received your precious letter, 
and it was a great comfort to us all to hear that you were kindly treated, 
and so " cheerful amidst all your afflictions." All are well here, and I 
must tell you that we receive the kindest sympathy from very many 
dear friends of yours for which, I feel to bless the " Givers of every 
good." We received a letter from Jason a few days ago, all were well 
there, and were at John's a few days before he wrote. They are sorrow 
stricken indeed. We sent coppies of your letter to them. Mr. Kellog 
a blind minister, and a most excellent man says " tell your Father for 
me, that I sympathise with him, and for him most deeply/' He 
preached a thanksgiving sermon, here, and he repeated a part of the 
58 th chapter of Isaiah. It was one of the best sermons I ever heard. 
It reminded me of the many times I had heard my dear Father read it. 
Your kind instruction will never be forgotten by me. I cannot tell you 
how / long to see you, nor can I express my feelings, you know them, 
& it is not necessary to express them. Please remember me (although 
a perfect stranger) to all those noble prisoners, colored as well as white. 
I often think of, and pray for them. I do hope to hear from you again. 
Mrs. Hinckley wishes to be remembered to you. Johny says "tell 
Grandfather that I know he is in prison because he tried to do good." 
Henry also says " tell Father, thoug[h] your life may be taken, your 
deeds, and influence will live to be remembered and do good." Please 
remember me to Captain [John] Avis. I never think of him, without 
a feeling of sincere gratitude for his kindness to you and the other 


prisoners. And now my dear Father, if I am never permited to see 
your dear face again in this world, I trust I shall meet you in that 
world where sorrow and parting never can come. I know that the 
Lord is with you, and that he will " never forsake you." May he 
strengthen & sustain you to the end, is the prayer of your affectionate 

Ruth Thompson 

Mr John Brown 
Care of Capt. John Avis 
Charleston Jefferson Co. 

[Endorsed on the envelope] 
Ruth Thompson 
Dont publish 
Not received untill 
after the execution 

James K. Hosmer, a Corresponding Member, told the story 
of the life of John Harvard in England, and of the influences 
surrounding him there. 

F. B. Sanborn submitted the following paper, in continua- 
tion of his paper read at the November meeting, 1907 : 

The Early History of Kansas, 1854-1861. 

In that Temarkable history of what he chose to call " The 
Rebellion " Lord Clarendon, though often tedious in his de- 
tails and prejudiced in his estimate of historical characters, 
has made his book an essential part of English literature by 
his deep knowledge of human nature and his long experience 
in great affairs, showing these qualities by his inimitable per- 
sonal portraits and his occasional remarks, sometimes tinged 
with grave humor. One of these remarks often occurs to me, 
and has been frequently quoted by others ; it has a bearing, 
if I am not mistaken, on the subject in hand. Clarendon 
ascribed some of the mistakes of his royal master, Charles I, 
to the clergy of the Church of England, who, he says, u know 
the least and take the worst measure of human affairs, of all 
mankind that can write and read." This judgment, severe in 
terms, has the greater weight as coming from a friend and 
supporter of that very church. Whether it should be ex- 
tended to the clergy of other churches, I leave to others to 
say ; but if it were true in 1641, and remains true now, it is 


certainly unfortunate that so much of the writing of history- 
should, have fallen into the hands of clergymen, or that other 
class, closely connected with the clergy, especially in England, 
— college professors. To take the true measure of human 
affairs is the special qualification of a historian ; and I am 
inclined to think that the training of the clergy and of 
college professors, together with their daily or weekly func- 
tions, does rather disqualify them for seeing and. describing 
how the great world's affairs go on. An earlier Englishman, 
Samuel Daniel, in his " Musophilus, or Defence of all Learn- 
ing," 1 said : 

Men finde, that action is another thing, 

Then what they in discoursing papers reade : 

The worlds affairs require in managing, 

More Artes than those wherein you Clerkes proceede. 

Those who remember most distinctly the course of events in 
the early history of Kansas are much surprised at the distorted 
view of them, and of the men who took part in them, taken 
by clergymen and college professors who have written about 
them. One of these, a member of this Society, Mr. Spring, 
has lately revised his book, which drew down upon him much 
censure from the citizens of Kansas, who declared that he 
had misunderstood and misrepresented the founders of their 
great and free State. I hope he has changed those pas- 
sages which they censured ; but whether he has done so or 
not, he cannot by any sort of history change the facts of the 
case. The former auditor and insurance commissioner of 
Kansas, who graduated at Harvard in 1856, and has since 
known and recorded the annals of Kansas more completely 
and faithfully than any citizen of that or any other State, was 
a severe critic of Mr. Spring's book. In his newspaper of 
October, 1885, Daniel W. Wilder said, in substance, among 
other things : 

He has written a book to tell us who we are, and who are our neigh- 
bors. And here it is all printed, — how Charles Robinson made Kan- 
sas. Robinson's wisdom ; Robinson's courage ; Robinson's diplomacy ! 
Kansas does not appear to have had any people, — none worth men- 
tioning. The name of Kansas should be blotted from the map, and 

1 S. Daniel, Complete Works, ed. by A. B. Grosart, i. 240. 


Robinson take its place. In the index Robinson is the longest title. 
And yet Robinson has had little to do with the early or late history of 
Kausas. He is a man of hates, grudges, revenges. Such men cannot 
become leaders ; they do not inspire confidence. This book will only 
serve the purpose of reviving all the ugly facts in his crooked history. 

Making some allowance for the natural irritation of a man 
who sees his friends and his State libelled, this is essentially a 
fair view of Charles Robinson's career. He was living when 
this was printed, and no doubt read it. Mr. Wilder did not 
wait as Robinson waited till long after John Brown was in his 
grave before he attacked his character and memory. He gave 
his verdict on Mr. Lawrence's friend to bis face, and the ver- 
dict will stand. From the day that Governor Robinson went 
out of office as the first State Governor of Kansas, until his 
death in 1894, — a period of more than thirty years, — I be- 
lieve he was never chosen by popular vote to any except to 
legislative office, and that but once in each house ; although 
he changed his politics once or twice in the interval, and of- 
fered himself as a candidate for governor on several occasions. 
When he got himself nominated in 1882, as the Greenback 
candidate, favoring the unrestricted issue of legal tender paper 
money, he received less than an eighth part of the votes cast, 
— 21,000 out of 179,000. He was wealthy, and sincerely in- 
terested in education, and received appointments in connec- 
tion with the State University and the State Historical Society ; 
but he had lost any hold he may have had on the confidence 
of the people at large. Mr. Lawrence seems to have taken 
Charles Robinson's word in expounding and magnifying the 
Governor's agency in freeing Kansas as unreservedly as Pro- 
fessor Spring did. But the professor knew enough of public 
sentiment in Kansas not to declare, as Mr. Lawrence had 
done, that Robinson u never bore arms." He informed his 
readers that, in the Wakarusa war, the free-state committee 
of safety intrusted the chief command of some six hundred 

to Dr. Robinson, with the rank of major-general, though he had 
never seen military service. To Lane they assigned a second rank. 
His practical war-record would naturally have claimed the first [rank], 
but the committee . . . did not dare to risk a frothy, pictorial, unballasted 
leadership [p. 92]. 


Whatever these words mean, they were intended as a scoff 
at a colonel who had led a regiment in the Mexican War, and 
who now had more military experience than any of the six 
hundred defenders. That he was willing to hold a second 
place under the arms-bearing Major-General Robinson, who 
had obtained from Mr. Lawrence two hundred Sharp's rifles 
for just such an emergency, speaks well for Lane's temper at 
the time. The difference between the two men, then and af- 
terwards, was stated by John Brown in one of those pointed 
phrases that so often adorn his spoken or printed utterances. 
Meeting our old friend, the late Charles A. Foster of Quincy, 
Massachusetts, then a young lawyer in Kansas, Brown was 
asked by Foster about the two general officers at Lawrence. 
44 They are both men without principle," was the reply, — 
"but when worst comes to worst Lane will fight, — and there 
is no fight in Robinson." In the Wakarusa affair both joined 
in deceiving the pro-slavery governor, Shannon, whose thirst 
for drink made him an easy mark for such adroit men. Whis- 
key played a great part in the dealings of the border ruffians. 
My Pennsylvania friend, Grosvenor P. Lowrey, who went on a 
mission from Lawrence to Shannon at the territorial capital, 
encountered a Missouri picket near Franklin, and thus de- 
scribed what followed : " We got the cork out as soon as we 
could of the only countersign we had, — and that passed us." 

The deceptive nature of the treaty which Robinson and 
Lane got Shannon to accept is described by Professor Spring 
(page 98) as " astutely designed to bear more than one inter- 
pretation — a treaty in which contradictory phrases shouldered 
and jostled each other." Even this treaty was kept from the 
knowledge of the Missouri invaders, who were treated, accord- 
ing to this historian, to another sample of Dr. Robinson's dip- 
lomacy. Even Atchison, whether drunk or sober, is reported 
as persuaded by the Robinson tactics, and advised his constitu- 
ents to go back to Missouri. Then, when all was over, accord- 
ing to Mr. Spring (page 101) there appeared on the scene, 
December 8, 1855, " an unknown man," John Brown, who de- 
nounced the Shannon treaty. How unknown he was to Rob- 
inson and Lane will appear from the following document, 
belonging to the widow of John Brown, Jr., of Put in Bay, 


Headquarters, Kansas Volunteers, Lawrence City, 
December 11, 1855. 

This is to certify that John Brown Jr. faithfully and gallantly served 
as private in the Liberty Guards, Kansas Volunteers, from the 27th 
day Of November, 1855, to the 13th day of December, 1855, in defend- 
ing the city of Lawrence in Kansas Territory, from demolition by 
foreign invaders; when he was honorably discharged from said service. 

John Brown, Captain. 

George W. Smith, Col. Com'g 5th Regt. Kansas Vols. 

J. H. Lane, Gen. 1st Brig. Kansas Vols. 

C. Robinson, Maj. Gen. 

Now, as Captain John Brown and his sons all became " Liberty 
Guards " at the same time, they had been in the service eleven 
days when Professor Spring speaks of the Captain as " an 
unknown man." In Lawrence, however, they had only ar- 
rived in the forenoon of December 7, — Brown and four of his 
sons, only. Jason and Oliver, with Henry Thompson, his 
son-in-law, had been ill at Jason's camp, eight miles north- 
west of Osawatomie, and were unable to march. George W. 
Brown, who has written copiously on all sides of the Kan- 
sas questions and drawn much on his imagination, says he 
saw Brown and his party arrive a little before sunset, seven 
in number, — there were actually five, — and about Decem- 
ber 3, three days before they appeared. He then adds, in 
substance : 

As the party dismounted [from a lumber wagon] I grasped the hands 
of John and Frederick Brown, who introduced me to their father and 
brothers. [These were Owen and Salmon Brown.] I took the whole 
family to the rooms of the Committee of Safety and introduced them. 
Here, at my suggestion, John Brown was first clothed with the title of 
Captain, conferred on him by Governor Robinson, and approved by the 
Committee of Public Safety. 

As the treaty with Shannon was not made until Sunday the 
9th of December, and Brown's speech, if ever made, in opposi- 
tion to it, was either the 9th or the 10th of December, and 
the above-cited certificate is dated the 11th, it is plain that 
Professor Spring has been misled by some of his authorities. 
He seems to have been willing to credit the worst he heard 


concerning John Brown and his family, no matter how im- 
probable or conflicting the testimony might be. Professor 
Spring was making out a case for the prosecution, not hear- 
ing the testimony on both sides, nor even cross-examining his 
own witnesses. Some of them told him, no doubt, that Brown 
" stood almost alone in Kansas " ; but he forgot to remember 
that Robinson in August or September, 1856, urged him, in 
the letter quoted by me on page 223, not to forsake Kansas ; 
that Lane, in September, 1857, twice urged Brown, then in 
Iowa, to come into Kansas with the rifles in his possession, and 
appointed him a brigadier-general in the volunteer army Lane 
then commanded ; that William A. Phillips, afterwards in 
Congress, Martin F. Conway, the first State congressman from 
Kansas, E. B. Whitman, the most faithful and unselfish of all 
the agents in Kansas of the Massachusetts State Committee, 
of which I was Secretary, and man}' others of the free-state 
leaders, invited Brown to come into the Territory. He did 
so, but without his rifles, for which in that year of repeated 
elections there was no pressing need. He was there again in 
the summer of 1858, protecting the Missouri border of Kansas 
from the raids occasionally made by the border ruffians, and 
co-operating with Captain James Montgomery in that needful 
duty. How he was regarded by the free-state party both in 
and out of Kansas, may be seen by the letter 1 which Mr. 
Lawrence sent him on March 20, 1857, saying, among other 
things : 

But in case anything should occur, while you are engaged in a great 
and good cause, to shorten your life, you may be assured that your 
wife and children shall be cared for more liberally than you now pro- 
pose. The family of " Captain John Brown of Osawatomie " will not 
be turned out to starve in this country, until Liberty herself is driven 
out. I hope you will not run the risk of arrest. 

Mr. Lawrence then, in May, 1857, drew the subscription 
paper substantially as follows: 

The family of Captain John Brown of Osawatomie have no means 
of support, owing to the oppression to which he has been subjected in 
Kansas Territory. It is proposed to put them [his wife and five chil- 
dren] in possession of the means of supporting themselves, etc. 

1 F. B. Sanborn, Life and Letters of John Brown, 374. 


The purpose of the subscription was to purchase, for one 
thousand dollars, land with improvements to the number of 
one hundred and sixty acres, of which eighty acres were to 
go to Mrs. Brown's farm, and the other half to the farm of 
Henry Thompson, who had married Ruth Brown, the only 
daughter of Brown's first marriage. There were fifteen sub- 
scribers, of whom one was anonymous ; the others were A. A. 
Lawrence, $ 310, G. L. Stearns, $260, John Bertram, of Salem, 
$75, J. Carter Brown, $100, W. R. Lawrence, J. M. S. 
Williams, and W. D. Pickman, each $50, Wendell Phillips 
and John E. Lodge, each $25, R. P. Waters, S. E. Peabody, 
John H. Silsbee, and " Cash " each $10, and B. Silsbee, $5. 
My own subscription took the form of my travelling expenses 
(about $50), to visit both Gerrit Smith in central New York, 
to whom $112 was due, and from whom the title deeds were to 
come, and the Brown and Thompson families at North Elba, to 
examine the land, satisfy the claims, and pay over the money. 
This I did in the first two weeks of August, 1857, — writing 
to Brown at Tabor, Iowa, August 14, that I had so done. To 
this he replied, August 27, substantially thus : 

I cannot express all the gratitude I feel to all the kind friends who 
contributed towards paying for the place at North Elba, after I had 
bought it ; as I am thereby relieved from a very great embarrassment, 
both with Mr. Smith and the young Thompsons ; and also comforted 
with the feeling that my noble-hearted wife and daughters will not be 
driven either to beg, or to become a burden to my poor boys, who have 
nothing but their hands to begin with. 

Some of the meaner of Brown's enemies have charged him 
with personal dishonesty. All this time that he was waiting, 
to have Mr. Lawrence and others make good their promise to 
pay for the land they authorized him to buy, Brown was at 
liberty to draw on G. L. Stearns for thousands of dollars, for 
military uses in Kansas, — but made no use of this permission, 
though sadly distressed that the young men to whom he had 
promised payment (one of whom was afterwards killed at 
Harper's Ferry), and his own wife and daughter, had not 
received their due. Brown was, in truth, of the most scrupu- 
lous pecuniary honesty, though twice unfortunate in large 
business operations. I am afraid the same cannot be said of 
Governor Robinson, Pomeroy, Lane, or G. W. Brown. 



The effort of many writers of late years, and among them 
I am sorry to rank our associate Professor Spring, seems to 
have been to show that the men contending on the two sides 
in Kansas from 1855 to 1859 were equally low in mental and 
moral qualities. Nothing could be further from the truth. 
No doubt some of the leaders on the free-state side were men 
without what John Brown called " principle," — that is, men 
who had not seriously taken their position on moral and 
political issues and could not be swerved from it by selfish 
considerations. This was certainly the case with General 
Lane, the most popular leader of our friends there for some 
ten years ; as it was with Dr. Robinson and with his associate, 
General Pomeroy, the two chief agents of the Emigrant Aid 
Company. With these three men the controlling considera- 
tion usually was — what moves the second grade of politicians 
everywhere — their own political or personal interest, whether 
of ambition or of pecuniary profit. Some others, of less 
prominence, could be named among the free-state men whom 
I knew, — and I knew most of those on the side of freedom 
that achieved any distinction, — who sometimes let their self- 
ish interests mislead them. But the mass of the free-state 
settlers were not, what a recent English novelist styles them, 
"the riff-raff of Northern towns [meaning cities], enlisted by 
the Emigrants' Aid Societies, and most of them unused to 
bear arms of any kind." On the contrary, they were gen- 
erally from small country places in most of the northern 
States, and from the southern States of Maryland, Kentucky, 
and Missouri in particular. They were not in the habit of 
carrying concealed arms, whether bowie knives, pistols, or 
whiskey flasks ; but they had been trained to the use of shot- 
guns and rifles, and many of them were of the local militia 
in their several States. What Mr. Gladstone, the London 
" Times " correspondent, said of them in November, 1856, 
agrees wholly with my own observation, substantially as 

Contrasting the towns built by the free-state population with Leaven- 
worth and other places, where the majority are from the South, one 
remarks in the former a greater number of mechanics, shopkeepers, use- 
ful artisans and laborers, and in the latter an excess of lawyers, doctors, 
rumsellers, and barkeepers. 


Let me name a few of these "riff-raff." Two brothers, 
Jefferson and Martin F. Conway, were born in Maryland, — 
one a carpenter, the other (afterwards judge and Congress- 
man) a law-student. Two brothers, John Montgomery and 
Samuel T. Shore, were born in North Carolina, — farmers who 
worked as such in Kansas, and fought under or in associa- 
tion with John Brown, afterwards Union soldiers in the 
Civil War. 

James Montgomery, the famous partisan leader, was born 
in Ohio, — a school-master in Kentucky, then a farmer in 
Missouri and in Kansas, — a distinguished officer in the 
Civil War. Professor Spring, who probably never knew 
him, disparages him as " not devoid of craft and stratagem, 
but without large mental or executive force." I knew him, 
and so did many others still living. In a life of unusual 
risks and exposure, and with a courage that never flinched, 
he fought through six or seven years of war, succeeded in 
most of his campaigns, and died, a veteran of the Civil War, 
in his bed in Kansas. I am incapable of measuring the 
amount of mental and executive force in a man, simply by 
reading about him, — but those who knew his career were 
the best judges of it. 

Six brothers, sons of John Brown, five of whom I knew, 
born in Ohio or Eastern New York, were farmers and wool- 
growers, and occasionally merchants, — all skilled in their 
business, whatever it might be ; trained from childhood to 
the use of arms and the management of horses, —admirable 
horsemen, like their father, and with most of the moral and 
domestic virtues, like him. Two of them were slain in 
Virginia, one in Kansas ; two others enlisted in the Union 
army, but soon were incapacitated. The widow of one of 
them has a captain's pension, which John Brown, Jr., 
would never draw, preferring to support himself. Finally, 
there was John Brown himself, with the qualities the world 

Here then are twelve of the early fighters in Kansas on 
the free-state side ; and no man who ever knew them could 
for a moment rank them with the hard-drinking, swearing, 
gambling, slaveholding men on the other side, or put the 
men on both sides in the same scoffing category. Perhaps 
the worst example of this false judgment was that of a col- 


lege professor in the Kansas State University, F. H. Hodder, 
who, in a book called " Civil Government in Kansas," published 
more than ten years ago, said in substance : 

A third class consisted of adventurers of various sorts from both 
sections : broken-down politicians, restless, lawless men, to whom the 
restraints of civilization were irksome ; gamblers, ruffians, and fugitives 
from justice, — - a class of men who always drift to new countries. They 
cared not whether slavery was voted up or down, but were ready to 
embrace any party that promised them office and power ; and welcomed 
a state of society in which murder, arson, and robbery would go 
unpunished. It was the presence of this class, ranged as they were 
on both sides of the political contest, that accounts largely for the 
disorder and bloodshed in the early history of the State. 

Now, if this professor were confining himself to what 
happened literally " in the early history of the State," — 
that is, after the admission of Kansas in 1861, — a measure 
of truth might be found in his picture. But then actual 
Civil War had supervened on the occasional civil war of the 
territorial period; and there is no evil like civil war to 
create, as well as to attract, the characters thus described, 
When that woe comes, it is as Ulysses says in " Troilus 
and Cressida" : 

Strength should be lord of imbecility, 

And the rude son should strike his father dead : 

Force should be. right ; or, rather, right and wrong 

(Between whose endless jar justice resides), 

Should lose their names, and so should Justice, too. 

Then every thing includes itself in power, 

Power into will, will into appetite ; 

And appetite, an universal wolf, 

So doubly seconded with will and power, 

Must make perforce an universal prey, 

And, last, eat up himself. 

But in the territorial period not more than two or three 
of the free-state men could be described, as dozens on the 
other side might be, in the terms employed by Hodder. 
General Lane was in some respects such a person, but with 
certain redeeming and popular qualities. Dr. Robinson 
might be so portrayed by his enemies ; but it was not a 
fair description of him until after Kansas became a State. 


George W. Brown, in his changing from one side to the 
other early in the territorial struggle, deserved some of the 
Hodder epithets. He was denounced by Dr. Robinson in 1857, 
and by most of the sincere free-state men in 1857 and 1858. 
His letters to Mr. Lawrence in the possession of this Society 
sufficiently disclose his character. The course of the national 
administration at Washington, whether directed by Jefferson 
Davis under the authority of President Pierce, or by the 
southern leaders under President Buchanan's authority, was 
a combination of force and fraud, which the chosen instru- 
ments, one after another, gradually revealed to the public. 
An important witness in 1856 and 1857 was John W. Geary, 
the Pennsylvania friend of Buchanan, sent out as Governor 
in August, to prevent the possibility of Buchanan's defeat, 
threatened by the continuance of the fighting in Kansas. In 
his private correspondence with President Pierce (printed 
in 1904, by a kinsman of General Pierce), Governor Geary 
said (December 22, 1856) substantially this : 

The censure which has been heaped upon your administration, for 
mismanagement in Kansas affairs, is not attributable to you ; but is the 
consequence of the criminal complicity of public officers, some of whom 
you have removed, the moment you were clearly satisfied of their true 
position. I could not have credited it unless I had seen it with my 
own eyes, and had the most conclusive evidence of the fact, — that 
public officers would have lent themselves to carry out schemes which 
at once set at naught every principle of right and justice upon which 
the equality and existence of our government is founded. You know 
that there is no man in the Union that more heartily despises the 
abolitionists than I do, or more clearly perceives the pernicious ten- 
dency of their doctrines ; and on this question I trust I am an impartial 
judge. The persecutions of the Free State men here were not exceeded 
by those of the early Christians. . . . The men holding official position 
have never given you that impartial information . . . which your high 
position so imperatively demanded. ... I am satisfied that there was a 
settled determination in high quarters, to make this a Slave State at 
all hazards ; that policy was communicated here, to agents, and most 
of the public officers sent here were secured for its success. The conse- 
quence was that when Northern emigrants came here at an early day, — 
even before the Emigrant Aid Societies began to excite public attention, 
— certain persons along the borders of Missouri began to challenge 
unexceptionable settlers. Finding many not for a slave State, they 
were subjected to various indignities, and told that this soil did not 


belong to such as them, and that they must settle in Nebraska. These 
immigrants, highly conservative in their character, excited by this unjust 
treatment, wrote back to their friends in the North ; and thus by a little 
indiscretion on the part of over-zealous persons in Missouri, a spark 
was ignited which nearly set the whole country in a flame. This 
virulent spirit of dogged determination, to force slavery into this 
Territory, has overshot its mark, and raised a storm. . . . Lecompte, 
Donaldson, Clarke, Woodson, Calhoun, and Isaacs were prominent 
actors in this fearful tragedy, and willing tools to carry out this 
wicked policy. They have therefore destroyed their public useful- 
ness. . . . Almost every public officer here conspired to give you ex parte 
and prejudiced statements. . . . There is a plan in Westport, Mo., to 
invade the Territory with 1000 men, to take possession of the Shawnee 
Reserve, about the 20th of February. The Indian agent lives there. 
Calhoun has been there ten or fifteen days. Can't you blow this 
conspiracy out of water? 

Again Geary wrote, January 12, 1857, substantially as 
follows : 

There has been, almost from the first, a combination here (the 
leaders of which are Gen. Calhoun, Sheriff Jones, with other lesser 
men at various points of the Territory, and having their headquarters 
at Westport,) to defeat my policy and to create the impression that the 
existing peace is entirely elusive, and without solid foundations. Vari- 
ous expedients have been devised to precipitate a collision between 
myself and the Pro-slavery party ; and with this view the most lying 
rumors have been put in circulation, and the boldest predictions of war 

Notwithstanding these faithful statements (which were 
quite true) but probably in consequence of them, Governor 
Geary was removed, or forced to resign, and another Pennsyl- 
vania Democrat, supposed to be true to slavery, Robert J. 
Walker, was sent in his place. He too was converted by the 
same evidence which had transformed Geary, and came out 
finally on the free-state side. I met Governor Geary in Phila- 
delphia in April, 1857, soon after I had had a long conference 
with Governor Reeder at Easton, and both these Democrats 
confirmed to me all that I had heard from our own agents as 
to the designs and conduct of the border ruffians. 

I may remark here, once for all, that, according to the usual 
conception of human testimony, I may claim to be a competent 


or, prima facie, a credible witness in regard to the early historj 
of Kansas, both as unorganized and disorganized Territory 
and as a State in the Union. I became interested in the 
sparsely settled Territory, not as a landholder or settler, but 
as a friend of free institutions, early in 1855, when I was of 
full age and able to understand facts and draw inferences, — 
so far as a course of instruction at Harvard College could 
enable me. I kept up my acquaintance with events and per- 
sons there through the whole disturbed period, from 1855 to 
1862, by correspondence, travel, and careful reading of the 
conflicting evidence furnished by newspapers, President's 
Messages, and printed books and speeches. I never allowed 
my opinions to be biased by buying lands there or running 
for office. I expended a year's time, first and last, and what 
was for me a good deal of money, to make Kansas a free 
State, and have three times visited it and travelled through 
portions of it, to see what had been the upshot of our early 
efforts. I have never been hired, as several of the would-be 
historians and chroniclers of Kansas have been, to write up 
any man's merits or write down any man's faults. I am 
therefore puzzled, occasionally, to know why I should be 
attacked and traduced by men whose cause I espoused when 
the whole force of the national government was against them, 
and with whom I had no quarrel until they picked one them- 
selves with me. I am a member of the Kansas Historical 
Society, which has collected the largest mass in the world of 
the documents illustrating the early history of the State ; have 
spent days examining this collection, and been in friendly 
correspondence with its secretaries from the beginning. I can 
therefore speak from actual knowledge with regard to most of 
the persons active in the settlement of the disputed questions 
in Kansas, and, I think, have always been able to judge with 
reasonable impartiality of their conduct and motives. I did 
not know the weak but good-natured President Franklin 
Pierce, during his term of office, but I made his acquaintance 
later, and think I understand the lamentable inconsistencies 
in his character. I fell in, during my travels, with an occa- 
sional border ruffian of the better sort, — the kind that wore 
good black swallow-tailed coats when in society, and had the 
outward manners of gentlemen when sober. One case of this 
sort may be described here, for the interesting facts connected 



with my short acquaintance with a young Kentuckian who 
soon after met his death as an invader of Kansas from 

In the spring and summer of 1856 I devoted myself almost 
exclusively to the work of raising money to promote and pro- 
tect free-state migration from New England to Kansas. Late 
in the summer I set forth on a long journey, with credentials 
from m} T friends Dr. Howe and George L. Stearns, — then 
respectively member and Chairman of the State Kansas Com- 
mittee of Massachusetts, of which I soon after became Secre- 
tary. My first business on this journey was to visit the 
headquarters of the National Kansas Committee at Chicago, 
where I made the acquaintance of its Executive Committee, 
Captain Webster (afterward General Webster, and Grant's 
chief of staff), Harvey B. Hurd, and Mr. Dole, with their 
active and brilliant young clerk, Horace White, afterwards a 
distinguished journalist in Chicago and New York. From 
there I went on to the State capital of Iowa, then Iowa 
City, to have an interview with the Adjutant-General of 
the State, in regard to the use of the State muskets in 
Kansas ; and from the capital I proceeded to the residence 
of Governor J. W. Grimes, afterwards senator and cabinet 
officer at Washington. He was at his home in Burlington, 
and I took tea with his family on a Sunday evening, and went 
with them to church to hear a discourse from Rev. Edward 
Beecher, with whom I had crossed the Mississippi the day 
before. Thence I proceeded by rail to Mount Pleasant, travel- 
ling on passes furnished by Fitz-Henry Warren, then superin- 
tendent of the Burlington and Missouri Railroad. At Mount 
Pleasant I had an interview with T. B. Eldridge, one of two 
brothers settled in Kansas, and sufferers by the destruction of 
the free-state Hotel in Lawrence in the preceding May. He 
was acting as superintendent of emigration to Kansas by the 
overland route, — the Missouri River being then closed to our 
settlers. He gave me information about my route through 
Iowa, and furnished me with a loaded revolver to protect me 
from the border ruffians, and a green plaid shawl to guard me 
from the dews and breezes of the prairie. I had never before 
nor since carried pistols, or any weapon except a stout stick, 
— but the dangers of this expedition were unknown, and so I 
took the loaded and capped Colt's pistol. It did not occur to 


me to test its shooting powers at first, and it was not till I 
had passed through the region infested (theoretically) with 
enemies that I tried its effect on the prairie chickens that 
were flying and lighting all about me on the grain-growing 
fields of Iowa, and the wild lands of the Missouri bottom, 
along the river of that name. Then, as I was driving north- 
ward from Nebraska City on the Iowa side, I stopped my 
driver and alighted to have a near shot at a covey of prairie 
chickens. I snapped every cap of my six barrels, but neither 
charge went off. The powder had fallen from the nipple of 
the barrel, and the cap did not ignite the powder in the barrel 
itself. What I should have done, if engaged in a shooting 
match with a Missourian, I have sometimes queried, — perhaps 
thrown my pistol at his head. 

I travelled from Mount Pleasant through the whole length 
of Iowa, day and night, over the line by which our emigrant 
bands were likely to go, — rumbling over the prairie roads in 
old and filthy stage-coaches, and catching naps by the way. 
Sometimes we would tarry for what was left of the night at 
new and filthy taverns, where the beds were shocking, and the 
food uneatable except for prairie chicken and wild plums, 
which could be cooked simply. After four days of this, we 
reached the military station of Council Bluffs, three or four 
miles from the channel of the Missouri, with wide bottom 
lands between. Here I found a good hotel, and ate a good 
supper, but could not sleep there, because a river steamboat 
was " tied up " for a steamer ball, after which, in the midnight 
hours, it would start for St. Louis and Nebraska City, fifty or 
sixty miles down the great river, where I was to stop off and 
meet riders from Kansas. We left the Council Bluffs hotel 
after supper, lighted by a bright moon, in a huge stage wagon, 
and I found myself seated beside a black-coated Kentuckian, 
with wide Byron collar and conspicuous shirt-wristbands, on 
his way to the same steamboat, in company with a Lieutenant 
Foster of the Army. He was about my own age (twenty-four), 
and very conversable. We soon got into conversation, and 
he revealed himself as George Greathouse, son of the county 
clerk of that county in Kentucky, in which Henry Clay and 
Colonel Benton of Missouri had found their wives, who were 

He knew the Benton family, and in company with Ran- 



dolph Benton, a son of the senator from Missouri, had accom- 
panied one of the expeditions of Fremont across the Rockies. 
But in 1856 he was opposed to Benton, who was then a candi- 
date for governor of Missouri, and he gave me some details of 
the election campaign, which was then going on or had just 
closed. He said he was going out on the plains with his 
friend Foster of the army, to shoot the buffalo, then very com- 
mon in Nebraska and Kansas. Arrived at the steamboat 
landing, we found (as he had anticipated) that a ball was to 
begin at once, and after securing our staterooms for down the 
river, he prepared himself for taking part in it, — having 
already, at the hotel, arrayed himself in funereal black for the 
festive occasion, — the color and costume then deemed suitable 
for balls. He found a partner in a pretty girl in blue silk 
with a muslin waist, and danced with her several times. 
When I had disburdened myself of my heavy revolver in my 
stateroom, I joined him in the steamer's saloon, and between 
the dances we continued our conversation about Missouri and 
the Bentons and Fremont. The latter was then a candidate 
for the presidency, and I listened with interest to what he 
may have told me about a man I had never seen and whom 
he had known years before. Of course I did not disclose 
the capacity in which I was then travelling, and we avoided 
by mutual consent the topic of the Kansas troubles. 

In the morning after the ball, I left the steamer at Nebraska 
City, bidding my Kentucky friend farewell, and not expecting 
to see him again, as he was to land some miles below and go 
out on the plains. I found that I had not time to enter 
Kansas through Nebraska, as Colonel Higginson had a few 
weeks earlier. I spent the Sunday in Nebraska City, saw 
the free-state men there, including a red-shirted rider from 
Kansas, and on Monday started by land up the river to 
Council Bluffs on my return. We stopped at a small town, 
either Sidney or Tabor, in Fremont County, for dinner, and 
waited there an hour or two, until our horse had eaten and 
digested his meal. As I was strolling about the little tavern, 
after my dinner, whom should I come upon at the stable but 
my Kentucky friend, with two or three horses, which he was 
feeding. No longer in ball-room black, he was dressed in the 
prairie costume of gray flannel and boots, without a coat. I 
spoke to him and said, " Why are you here, and not out on 


the prairie shooting buffaloes ? " He hung his head, and re- 
plied, " Down in Missouri they told me that the abolitionists 
are making trouble in Kansas, and I am going in with some 
of our men to put a stop to it." I urged him not to do so, 
saying that he had better keep out of harm's way, as " the 
dragoons of Uncle Sam will keep the peace there, and you 
will not be needed." He said that he had promised to go in, 
and must keep his word. He did so, joined an invading 
party, and was shot in a skirmish near Franklin, in the vicin- 
ity of Lawrence. My friend Whitman, when I saw him after- 
ward in Massachusetts, where he spoke at some of the Kansas 
meetings for which I had made arrangements, in October, — 
one, I remember, was at Carlisle, near Concord, — told me that 
he had seen Greathouse lying dead on the prairie between 
Lawrence and Franklin. He remembered the incident, which 
was not uncommon in Kansas that year, from the singularity 
of the man's name (Greathouse), which he had never heard 
before. There were many of those fighting on the pro-slavery 
side, no doubt, as agreeable and as reckless as my Kentucky 
comrade of a single night. 

All this time, from June to September, 1856, bodies of 
immigrants and individuals had been making their way into 
the Territory, — some, but by no means all, through the 
agency of the Emigrant Aid Company, of Boston. This 
company had been very active in aiding immigrants and send- 
ing rifles during 1855 and 1856, but had suffered much by loss 
of its property from the Missouri raids. It left the work, in 
the later months of 1856 and the whole year 1857, largely 
to the National Kansas Committee and the Massachusetts 
State Committee, and to Gerrit Smith, who gave one thousand 
dollars a month during the active period of hostilities in 1856, 
and for some months longer. The State committee used the 
funds of the Faneuil Hall committee, after the thorough 
organization of the State committee by the election of George 
L. Stearns as its chairman ; having previously had its funds 
used in a masterly way by Dr. Howe, during the months 
of June and July. From about the first of August, 1856, 
Mr. Stearns and his State committee became the working 
centre of aid to the free-state men of Kansas, and were 
heartily seconded by the Middlesex County committee, of 
which I had been secretary since early in June ; by the Wor- 


cester County committee, of which Colonel Higginson was an 
active member ; and by the Hampden County committee, of 
which my brother-in-law, George Walker, an old friend of 
John Brown while he lived in Springfield, was chairman. 
There were other county committees, and numberless town 
committees in Massachusetts, which had been formed during 
the summer and autumn ; and from all these contributing 
sources many thousand dollars in money, arms, and clothing, 
poured into Kansas during 1856 and 1857, — to an aggregate 
far exceeding, I believe, the contributions made by Mr. Law- 
rence's Emigrant Aid Company, even in paid-up stock sub- 
scriptions ($145,300) during its whole existence. Professor 
Carruth gave a fair and favorable account to the Kansas 
Historical Society in January, 1897, of all the operations of 
the Emigrant Aid Company for the eight years of its active 
existence (1854-1862), from which I have taken the figures 
above. He shows that it had other resources, which brought 
up its total to be accounted for in 1862 to $172,218 ; of which 
more than half had passed through the hands of General 
Pomeroy. Commenting on Pomeroy, afterwards senator in 
Congress from Kansas, Professor Carruth said : x 

Mr. Pomeroy was not, however, a financier. Some mild-mannered 
Westerner once warned a stranger against trifling with Wild Bill, ex- 
plaining that he was "reckless with fire arms." Mr. Pomeroy was 
reckless with drafts. The books do not show for what many of these 
drafts were drawn, but it is fair to presume that all bargains were con- 
strued liberally in behalf of the emigrant. . . . Pomeroy always paid 
liberally. He was not the man to make a sharp bargain for the com- 
pany. Very likely the company would have dismissed him if he had 
done so. Three mills, costing in New York $4000, paid in freight 
$2146, and an additional $583 for storage. The proprietor of the 
Herald of Freedom [one of Mr. Lawrence's witnesses against John 
Brown] repaid his loan of $2000 in territorial scrip which was never 
redeemed. An agent of the company [perhaps Dr. Robinson], in mak- 
ing settlement, turned in ten shares of Quindaro town stock at $3578, 
which was then rated high, but soon became worthless. 

The expenses of the Boston office of the company in eight 
years were $30,465 ; of the agents in Kansas, Professor 
Carruth estimated the cost at $27,000 as below the mark, — 

1 Transactions, Kansas State Historical Society, vi. 94, 95. 


no exact account appearing. Probably some of the expenses 
of sending 011 rifles were charged in the Kansas expenses. 
Finally the assets of the company existing in February, 1862, 
were all sold at auction to a Boston firm for $16,150, — less 
than twelve per cent of their nominal value, which was then 
figured by the treasurer as $143,322.98. That one-tenth part of 
the emigration of free-state men to Kansas in the four critical 
years was due, directly or indirectly, to the Emigrant Aid 
Company in 1854-1857, would in my judgment be a large esti- 
mate. There are no figures showing even that small percent- 
age. Nevertheless it did a good work, and if its finances in 
Kansas had been in the hands of more careful men, it would 
probably have done more. Two of the pro-slavery governors 
of the Territory, Walker and Stanton, came to their duties in 
Kansas on tickets issued by the company. They were duly 
converted to our side, — but hardly by officers of the com- 
pany. One of its defaulting debtors, G. W. Brown, claims 
chief credit for their conversion ; but few believe his story, or 
his motives to have been other than money-making. So 
notorious, even in 1857, were several of the would-be leaders 
of the free-state men, for utilizing their position to advance 
their own interests, that my friend G. L. Stearns wrote in 
May, 1857, to his friends in New York : 

Many of the Free State leaders, being engaged in speculations, are 
willing to accept peace on any terms. Brown and his friends will hold 
to the original principle of making Kansas free, without regard to 
private interests. 

I was personally cognizant at the time of these facts. But 
the bulk of the free-state men were honest, unselfish men, 
like Samuel Walker and James Montgomery, both of them 
steady friends of John Brown, and both of that unconquerable 
Scotch-Irish blood, which has been so conspicuous in the wars 
and revolutions of the United Kingdom and the United States. 
Too little is known in this part of the world of these two 
men, and particularly of Montgomery, — for Walker has been 
cited as a witness by Messrs. Robinson and Lawrence, al- 
though a man as unlike them as possible. Montgomery has 
been already briefly described by me ; but here is the testi- 
mony of a late Kansas settler, Judge Botkin, who, a veteran 
soldier of the Civil War at the age of nineteen, settled in Linn 


County, which had been Montgomery's home for ten years. 
The judge quotes with approval the saying of John Brown, — 
41 Captain Montgomery is the only soldier I have met among 
the prominent Kansas men; he is a natural chieftain, and 
knows how to lead." Then Judge Botkin tells this thrilling 
anecdote of the last sermon preached by Montgomery (a 
Campbellite) but a few days before his death, at Trading Post, 
where the ruffian Hamilton had murdered or left for dead 
ten Kansas settlers in May, 1858. It is substantially as 
follows : 

On the Sunday before his death, in December, 1871, Montgomery 
preached at Trading Post. It was my privilege to hear his discourse. 
I sat near the front, with Austin Hall and Amos Hall on the one hand, 
and Mrs. Harvey Smith on the other. The Halls were of the number 
of Hamilton's victims in the Marais des Cygnes massacre, who fell at 
the first fire, and escaped by feigning death. Mrs. Smith was formerly 
Mrs. Colpetzer, wife and widow of one of Hamilton's victims. In the 
audience were various children of the victims. Also a score or more 
of the men were present who had stood around the bodies of the slain, 
and applaudingly shouted "Amen ! " when their renowned leader regis- 
tered his vow that the blood of the dead and the tears of the widows 
and children should not be shed in vain. It was an audience worthy 
of the hero, and only a James Montgomery, in spirit and action, was 
worthy of such an audience. As he arose to begin the services, and 
fixed his gaze on the familiar faces of those who had suffered, and 
whose sufferings he had so fully avenged, a gleam of joy and satisfac- 
tion seemed to blaze from his penetrating eyes, and thrilled the au- 
dience into perfect accord. He hesitated a moment, and then requested 
all to arise and sing " Battle Hymn of the Republic." The noble 
thought of that grand hymn stirred the crowd to the deepest depth of 
feeling. The text was in keeping with the occasion. " Be not de- 
ceived ; God is not mocked, for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall 
he also reap." His theme was the accountability of communities, 
institutions, and nations to the same laws of God that govern the 
individual. The discourse was logical, powerful, and impressive. 
Before us stood that tall and slender form ; his shaggy shock of long 
black hair and his shaggier black whiskers united to entirely enclose 
in a circle the forehead, the eyes and nose, but left enough exposed to 
reveal the deep and sincere earnestness of the speaker. With his 
first sentence he was not only in elbow touch with his hearers, but 
enchained them with his magnetic manner and qualities. After having 
illustrated how God's will has been worked out by men in our own 
national affairs, and how at times men, without realizing the fact, 


have uttered prophecies that were fulfilled to the letter, he broke out 
with substantially these words . " I call upon my old friends in this 
audience, and upon brother Austin Hall particularly, to remember 
what I said to you at a certain sorrowful meeting, nearly fourteen years 
ago, when I prophesied that the remaining years of slavery could be 
numbered upon the fingers of one hand, — and that, in that period, I 
would lead a host of negro soldiers, dressed in the national uniform, in 
the redemption of our country and the negro race from the curse of 

It was an impressive scene and occasion, and being the old hero's 
last sermon (for he died a few days afterward), it was a memorable 

This was Professor Spring's man of straw, " without large 
mental or executive force." Montgomery was exactly what 
Brown called him, •* a natural leader," — a chevalier, in fact, 
and always holding himself a little above his followers, as his 
Scotch ancestors had done. Walker was a man* of another 
type, — resembling Montgomery chiefly in the indispensable 
quality of intrepid courage on all occasions ; but otherwise a 
"good fellow," read}' to follow if not to lead, and of a hearty 
social turn. When I held my interview with him at Law- 
rence (1882), he was sitting in his shirt-sleeves in the shade 
of his livery stable, — he a retired volunteer colonel of the 
Civil War. His bearing was such as to give you instinctive 
confidence in what he might say, — nothing vainglorious, 
nothing for effect, no afterthoughts. If he afterward denied 
some of the things he said to me, as Governor Robinson seemed 
to imply, in his long letter to Mr. Lawrence among our files, it 
was probably because Robinson had misrepresented the point 
in question. His bearing never did inspire confidence in me, 
although he seems to have induced Mr. Lawrence to take him 
at his own valuation, which was always a high one. A Kansas 
Quaker, William H. Coffin, cousin of Levi Coffin, one of the 
leading conductors on the " Underground Railroad," has this 
to say of Walker: 

He was really an unassuming, quiet man in private life, and a good 
citizen ; and yet he proved to be a born leader and a man of fearless 
bravery, iron will, and determination. He and Major Abbott prob- 
ably did more fighting with their companies than any other leaders, 
unless it might be old John Brown in the Southern counties. 


Born of Scotch-Irish parentage in Pennsylvania, and bred 
to rough labors, Walker at the age of thirty-three went to 
Kansas in March, 1855, as one of a large party of men, women, 
and children, intending to settle as a community, and without 
help from any Aid Company. Walker did settle by himself 
in Kanwaka township, Douglas County, seven miles west of 
Lawrence, April 12, 1855. This was about equally near to 
Lawrence and Lecompton, the two chief towns of the anti- 
slavery and pro-slavery parties. Topeka was not far off. 
Early in May or late in April he was visited by Jones of 
Westport, afterwards sheriff, with 150 mounted men, who 
threatened Walker, and told him they would be back in two 
weeks, " to drive all the damned nigger-stealers from the 
Territory." And now I quote, in substance, from Walker's 
colloquial narrative. He was an Ohio Democrat, but he knew 
his rights. 

As soon as the Missourians were out of sight, I dropt my axe, and 
started around the settlement to let my friends know what was up. I 
travelled all night afoot, and the next day 86 men met at my cabin. 
We organized ourselves into a military company, the Bloomington 
guards, and I was first sergeant. It was the first company organized 
in Kansas. Having no arms, the guards made a levy of $2 each, and 
sent our captain, Read, to Massachusetts, after Sharp's rifles. The 
captain never came back, but in December, 1855, 80 rifles came to my 
charge from Boston. I notified the company to meet me at night on 
the Wakarusa ; and that night we entered Lawrence, a well equipped 
army of 80 men. The border ruffians at Lecompton somehow heard 
what I had received, and came down to search my premises. They 
found no arms, but set fire to my haystacks, corn and other crops, and 
destroyed everything we had. Winter was at hand, no work, and no 
floor or loft in the cabin, and nothing but a small cookstove to keep us 
warm. I made up my mind from that day forward, until either the 
border ruffians or ourselves were driven from Kansas, I would live at 
their expense, and kept my resolution. Sometimes we had plenty to 
eat, sometimes nothing, but through it all we managed to live. 

Now I submit that Robinson would have been no worse a 
man if, like Walker, he had " borne arms" ; and I would have 
asked Mr. Lawrence, as soon as I knew him (the next year) 
whether there was any moral claim on Walker to buy eat- 
ables of the men who had destroyed his crops, if he could find 
any of their property to make good the loss. And bear in 


mind that he was one of the most industrious and useful 
citizens of Kansas from that day to his death. But to go on 
with the substance of his narrative : 

Ie the summer of 1855, I lost a valuable yoke of oxen, and went to 
West-port in Missouri to look for them. At night, not daring to go to a 
house, I lariated my horse and lay down on the grass. A terrible rain 
came on, and I determined to venture into some Indian cabin, tried sev- 
eral, but could get no lodging. Finding a more pretentious house, I 
asked a boy if I could get to pass the night there. He said, " No, — 
by and by bad Indians come, bring whiskey, make a row, — chop 
head off dam quick." I determined to risk bad Indians rather than 
wild woods. The woman of the house got me some supper and gave 
me a bed. 

The Indians came, thirty men and women, with ten gallons 
of whiskey, and made a night of it. In the morning Walker 
counted six squaws and nine bucks lying on the floor in a 
heap, all dead drunk. " I have seen many sprees," he adds, 
" but never another like that." In August the successor of 
Governor Reeder, Wilson Shannon from Ohio, came, and 
Walker with other Ohio men went over to Lecompton to hear 
what he had to say, which was substantially this : 

When he got out of his carriage he could hardly stand. He made a 
speech, stating that he was from the North, but had no sympathy with 

the Free State party ; they were a lot of d d abolitionists, whom he 

hated ; the laws of the Legislature should be enforced, and he had the 
whole power of the general government to back him. Several Free 
State men were standing together, whom he seemed to recognize ; kept 
looking at them and pointing to them, and said, " I have no sympathy 
with nigger-stealers." 

This was the representative of the government, to which 
Mr. Lawrence says Robinson was loyal. After the Wakarusa 
war, in which Walker and John Brown had parts, the hard 
winter of 1855-1856 came on. He says in substance : 

Old settlers will never forget that winter. The mercury went down 
lower and lower till it registered 20 degrees below zero, and remained 
at that point some time. Provisions ran low, no money was to be had, 
nor any employment. I was driven to such an extremity that I went 
to Lawrence searching for work all day, — finding none, went to Lane 
in the evening and told him my family were starving. I would do any- 



thing, — make rails, chop wood or anything else. Lane could give me 
no work, but gave me an order on the store for $11, that I could pay 
back when able. I bought flour and bacon, sugar and coffee, and 
started home through the deep snow. My wife got up, made some 
batter-cakes, fried some bacon and made coffee, — a meal such as I 
never enjoyed again in my life. We used wild sorrel for pies, and 
wild peas for soup ; wild plums and gooseberries were also plenty that 
year. In April, Cols. Buford and Titus arrived, with a force of 1000 
men, recruited in the South, and made headquarters three miles from 
my house, building a strong blockhouse a mile from Lecompton and 
another on Washington creek. Their first aggressive act was to drive 
a Free State man, Nicholas, from his claim on that creek ; and eight 
men, headed by Walker, started to his rescue. One of the eight, Luke 
Allen, wore a red shirt, like one of Buford's men. About five miles 
southwest of Lawrence, he. espied a mounted captain riding down the 
Wakarusa, with sword and pistols and bowie knives. Behind him 
were two or three wagons, heavy-laden, and guarded by a detachment 
of men, conveying supplies from Lecompton to Franklin. The cap- 
tain, mistaking Allen for a friend, inquired the way to Franklin, and 
said when he went back he would " wipe out " Nicholas. Hardly were 
the words out of his mouth when eight or ten carbines were pointed at 
him ; and he was forced to dismount — ungraciously, for he was a brave 
fellow. In the meantime Walker and Allen climbed up the bank and 
awaited the coming of the wagons. As they passed by, Walker and 
Allen levelled their rifles and ordered them to surrender, which they 
did, without firing a shot. Among the articles captured were one bay 
horse, six yoke of oxen, three good wagons, loaned with flour, bacon, 
etc., five kegs of powder, a barrel of whiskey, rifles, revolvers, bowie 
knives and a gold-mounted sword. The captain begged for his horse 
and sword, saying the ladies of Mobile had given them, and he would 
rather die than give them up. I returned them to him. 

Thus was Walker for a time enabled to live at the expense 
of the enemy. But the time for more serious fighting was 
now at hand. The attack on Lawrence by Atchison and 
his army (in which an Englishman calling himself Robert H. 
Williams says he was a soldier) was imminent, and Walker 
was despatched with a letter to Governor Shannon, in Le- 
compton, from the Lawrence Committee of Safety, asking his 
protection for the threatened town. Walker says it might 
have been defended by the seven hundred free-state men in 
it," but for the actions of Pomeroy, Roberts, and a few others, 
who insisted they should lay down their arms and submit to 


the United States marshal." "At that time," he says, "Rob- 
inson was a prisoner, Lane was gone, and there were no men 
who could be looked to as leaders." He adds : 1 

My road [to Lecompton] led me past the camp of the border ruffians 
and past my own house. Not seeing any pickets, ... I went into my 
cabin to get my overcoat, leaving my pistols in my holster and my old 
musket at the door. Imagine my surprise on entering to find ... a 
sergeant and six men [border ruffians]. As good luck would have it, the 
children were all asleep except the two oldest, who were posted about me. 
I said nothing, and my wife said nothing. The sergeant asked me where 
I was going and where I was from. I informed him that I lived on 
Washington creek, a settlement of pro-slavery people, that I was a 
member of the grand jury then in session at Lecompton, and that I 
was not well. ... 1 asked for an overcoat. My wife said she had one 
that belonged to her husband, and that I could have it if I would prom- 
ise to return it. I took the overcoat and left. . . . [At] the door two 
men from Missouri came up. . . . heavily armed and well mounted. I 
told them the same story, and as they were going to Lecompton and 
believing me all right, they told me what was going to be done ; that the 
United States marshal would take his posse into Lawrence, make his 
arrests, and then disband them . . . ; that they would then burn and 
sack it, and then drive out every abolitionist in Kansas and appropriate 
their improvements. . . . near Lecompton we met a man who knew 
me — Mr. James Curlien. He asked me where I was going. One of 
the men spoke up and said that I was a member of the grand jury. 
"The hell he is," was all the reply I heard, for I left them just then, 
not wishing to argue with them. ... In a few moments the men came 
thundering along. . . . Dropping my old musket, I drew my revolvers 
and got ready. ..." Now, damn you, tell me what you are going to 
Lecompton for." " To carry a message to the governor," I replied. 
" They want protection down there." Putting spur to their horses, 
they dashed into Lecompton before me. . . . [Presently] a man named 
Corbet, who . . . though a pro-slavery man, was bound to me by personal 
favors done him, stopped me . . . [and said] I must not enter the town ; 
that a party was forming to take and hang me. He told me to give 
him the letter to the governor and light out for his home [five miles 
out], where he would bring me the answer. Looking up the road, I 
saw five mounted men riding like mad towards me, and yelling at the 
top of their voices. I threw Corbet the letter, and, turning, put my 
horse on the run. . . . [They were] better mounted than I, and the balls 
began to whistle round me uncomfortably close. I made for a ravine, 

1 Transactions, Kansas State Historical Society, vi. 260-262. 


and was soon out of sight in the timber. . . . [They] went back to 
town and reported that they had killed the damned Yankee and left him 
lying in the road. . . . Corbet brought me the governor's reply, set- 
ting forth, in substance, that the citizens of Lawrence were all traitors 
and could, therefore, expect no protection from him. . . . I . . . reached 
Lawrence about daylight, with the governor's letter. The committee 
advised us to hide our arms, saying that no harm would be done when 
it was found that the parties sought were not in the city. Captain 
Abbott, Stone, McWhinney, Saunders, Wright, Leonard, Umbarger 
and myself . . . [took] our company and [left]. . . . That evening [May 
21, 1856] we waylaid a provision train returning from Lawrence, and cap- 
tured several wagons laden with plunder. ... At that time the pros- 
pects for the free state party looked worse than ever before or since. 
. . . There were but four free-state companies with anything like a 
complete organization. . . . Captains Abbott, Shores, John Brown, sr., 
and John Brown, jr., had a few men with them ; while Captain 
Mitchell, . . . and Captain Saunders, had a few more. Two com- 
panies at Topeka and my own company were about the only ones that 
kept up their drill. Our forces did not amount, all together, to more 
than 400. 

It was immediately after this that Brown made his stroke 
at Pottawatomie, and a few days later captured Pate and his 
company of border ruffians at Black Jack. From that time 
the free-state cause began to gain, and one victory after 
another for that side startled the administration at Washing- 
ton, and in July led to the appointment of Governor Geary in 
place of the drunken, incompetent Shannon. Robinson tried 
to make it appear that Pierce and Davis plotted to have the 
free-state men come into collision with the army, and that 
John Brown was always itching to bring on such a collision 
and urging his friends to do it. These theories do not keep 
probability even in distant view. If such was Brown's con- 
stant purpose, why did he not do it ? Not for lack of oppor- 
tunity, for he was in the field with companies of men for eight 
or nine months in 1855-1856, was in the near presence of United 
States troops many times, and was sometimes pursued by them. 
Why did he not for once turn upon them and bring on the war 
which he and Lane are constantly charged with desiring ? One 
good reason was that Brown wished for nothing of the sort, 
and another was that the rank and file of the army, and even 
some of the higher officers, were friendly to the free-state 
cause, and aided its advocates on several occasions to escape 


arrest and imprisonment by the border ruffian territorial au- 
thorities. Mr. Walker gives several instances of this in his 
own experience, and the narrative is in substance as follows : 1 

Sometime in June I received notice that a Capt. McDonald, a border 
ruffian, was about to raid my cabin and burn everything. I picked ten 
men from my company, sent my family away, and opened loopholes for 
rifles ; set lookouts and then went to bed. At 2 a. m. I was told that 
horsemen were coming from the northeast (the Missouri direction). 
In a moment every man was at his post. It was bright moonlight, and 
every movement of the marauders was distinguishable ; about 30 in 
force, they rode leisurely up to my house, not expecting resistance. 
McDonald's orders were distinctly heard. They dismounted, tied their 
horses to my fence and filed into the yard. When the last man was 
inside my fence, outspoke ten Sharp's rifles, and four of them lay 
wounded on the grass. The rest fled ; but two men and four horses 
were captured. John Shannon, son of the governor, was in the party, 
but escaped unhurt. Among the captives was a notorious desperado 
named Wauffle, who had lived near me awhile, and had been cared for 
by Mrs. Walker when sick and deserted by his friends. This fact was 
generally known, and my wife had difficulty in keeping my men from 
stringing him up, then and there. At daybreak I disbanded my men, 
and went to house of a friend to sleep. As soon as Gov. Shannon 
heard of the fight, in which his son was reported killed, he sent some 
companies of U. S. soldiers, under Capt. Sturges, an old playmate of 
mine, and went along with them to avenge his son's death, — swearing 
he would have my scalp before night. He asked my wife where I was ; 
she said I had gone and taken the spoils of the fight with me. Shannon 
grew very angry, and tried to ride into my cabin ; but Capt. Sturges 
held him back, and placed a guard at my door. ... As soon as the 
coast was clear, I left for the Wakarusa rendezvous, and waited there 
till evening, believing that my cabin was burned. At evening I started 
for Lawrence. While trudging along, lost in thought, near the claim 
of Capt. Barber (brother of the man murdered in December), I was 
startled by the tramp of horses, and looking ahead, saw coming along 
the road Gov. Shannon, Col. Titus, and Captain Sturges with some 50 
soldiers. They were single file, Shannon between Titus and Sturges, — 
the latter followed by his men. I jumped into a clump of bushes, not 
ten feet from the road, and cocked my rifle, determined to kill the gov- 
ernor, at least, if discovered. But Shannon and his comrades were 
looking at something, the other side of the road, and did not see me. 
Captain Sturges and his men all recognized me, some nodding, some 
smiling and some giving the military salute. 

1 Transactions, Kansas State Historical Society, vi. 262, 263. 


If this is not conclusive as to the attitude of these soldiers, 
what would be ? Another scene in which Walker figured re- 
lates to a better known event, the dispersion of the free-state 
legislature at Topeka by Colonel Sumner, at that time the rank- 
ing army officer in the Territory, who had made a treaty with 
John Brown and his captives three weeks before, by which Pate 
the Virginian got his freedom. The date now is July 3, 1856. 
The narrative of Walker continues substantially as follows : 1 

Our leaders were then either away or in the hands of the enemy. 
Colonel Sumner was camped near Topeka with 600 men. The evening 
before the opening of the legislature, Col. Sumner sent me a note, say- 
ing he wished to see me on important business. I went, and found him 
surrounded by U. S. marshals and deputies, and a large party of pro- 
slavery men, among them Acting Governor Woodson, Stringfellow, 
Judge Cato, Judge Elmore, and others that I did not know. I felt 
uneasy. Col. Sumner said, " The governor and the marshal both say 
that if I attempt to disperse the legislature tomorrow, you fellows will 
resist ; that Lane is on the other side of the river with 400 men, and 
that you can command a thousand more on this side." 

" That 's all nonsense," said I ; " there are not 400 men in Topeka. 
Lane is out of the Territory, and no one will think of hindering you or 
the marshal." 

The marshal jumped up and paced up and down. '* Do you pretend 
to say, that the governor and I would misrepresent the facts to Col. 
Sumner? If he should go into Topeka and attempt to read the gov- 
ernor's proclamation, he would be shot down at the end of the first 

" Bah," said I, "no such thing ! I am not armed, but I '11 go with 
the colonel, and stand before him till he reads all the messages in 
Kansas, if you say so. There will be no resistance." On that a Texan 
named Perkins, an officer in the army, sprang up and handed me his 
pistols, with " By God, as good a fellow as you shan't be without arms, 
if I can help it." The governor stared at the marshal, and the marshal 
at the governor. They began to lose confidence in the troops, and 
well they might. Many a night, after being hounded all day by the 
soldiers, under the marshal or governor, have I walked into their camp, 
and received the treatment of a prince, — food and ammunition, more 
than I could carry away. Col. Sumner called me to one side and said, 
" Walker, I don't want to hurt any one ; you are all right and have 
my sympathies ; but the government is against you, and I must obey 
the government." He then dismissed me and I went back into 

1 Transactions, Kansas State Historical Society, vi. 264, 265. 


It turned out as Walker had said. Why should Brown, or 
any other free-state man, wish to shoot at such soldiers as 
these ? The idea is preposterous. One man, however, always 
tongue-valiant, but never, since his California riot, in any en- 
gagement, Charles Robinson, published in his book, issued 
thirty-six years afterward (1892), a conversation that he says 
he had with Colonel Sumner in that same July. It is this : 

Colonel Sumner . . . complained that the Legislature compelled him 
to make a show of force, when Kobinson told him the movement [against 
the legislature] was violating a constitutional right of the people, and 
had he [Robinson] been at Topeka, he would have made it necessary 
for him to kill some one in doing so [p. 298]. 

As the killing would have been in resisting United States 
soldiers, Robinson would have us believe that he would have 
done the very thing which he charges Brown with always 
being ready and eager to do. But the imprisoned governor 
would have done no such thing. He was probably devoutly 
thankful that he was in prison, and not called upon to show 
his valor at Topeka. 

I need make no more quotations from Walker's lively nar- 
ration of events. The whole is printed in the sixth volume 
of the Transactions of the Kansas State Historical Society 
(pp. 249-274), published in 1900, and never, I think, called in 
question for its substantial accuracy Walker was a warm 
friend of Brown, though not agreeing with him in some 
points; and what he knew about the army would naturally 
have been known to Brown. He was also a friend of Lane's, 
and would not have swallowed Robinson's wild tales of Lane's 
assassination schemes. Had he heard of them, Walker would 
have said, "That is Lane's tall talk," and laughed them down. 

I am now coming to a serious examination of the Kansas 
manuscripts in possession of our Society, but must defer 
their explanation to a later meeting. 

Edward Stan wood, for Worthington C. Ford, of Wash- 
ington, D. C, a Corresponding Member, communicated the 
following letters, with an introductory note by Mr. Ford. 

In this passage of letters between Edward Everett and John 
McLean is discussed the question of patronage and the prin- 
ciples which should control the distribution of public office. 


The writers, as well as the time, of the letters make them of 
historical interest. McLean had served under Monroe and 
under John Quincy Adams ; he passed from Adams into the 
Jackson regime, as severe a test of a man's character as could 
be devised. That he had used the patronage of the post-office 
for political ends was the firm conviction of Adams, who was 
in a position to know. The very fact that Jackson wished him 
to remain in the post-office is good proof that he had been 
useful, if not instrumental, in securing Jackson's election. It 
was a time of political proscription, and McLean could not 
have been considered with favor by Jackson if he had re- 
mained as neutral as he would wish us to believe he had 
been. Refusing to make a sweep among the postmasters, he 
was elevated to the Supreme Bench, where he served for many 
years, and from which he delivered a dissenting opinion in 
the momentous Dred Scott case. One point in these letters 
can be emphasized, the general testimony given to the high 
purposes of the younger Adams, and the unanimous commenda- 
tion given to his methods of appointing to office. This really 
involves high praise, for no abuse of patronage is laid at his 

Edward Everett to John McLean. 

(Private.) Boston, 1 Aug. 1828 

Dear Sir, — In pursuance of the intimation in my late letter to you, 
I now beg leave to make a few remarks, in reply to your letter of the 
14 July. It is only to the first of these, that I attach any importance 
myself, the rest I throw out, rather because you seem to invite the ex- 
pression of an opinion, than because it ought to have any weight with 
you, when expressed. 

All that I wish particularly to say is, that I hope you have not 
inferred, from the mean and false insinuations in the Boston States- 
man, that I have or have had anything to do with editing the Patriot. 
Your addressing me so particularly, on the subject of editorial remarks 
in that paper, about the time, when the profligate print, just named, 
was daily asserting or intimating, that I was engaged, in some way, in 
editing it, leads me to think it possible, that you might have supposed, 
that, as in the case of most other lies, there was, at least, a foundation 
of truth in this. I beg leave, therefore, to assure you, that the insinu- 
ation is false, and as mean as false, considering that it was first made, 
in reference to some editorial remarks in the Patriot, complimentary 
to myself. 

With this observation, excited by your having written to me, at this 


particular juncture, prudence would bid me stop. I will venture, how- 
ever, on a better principle than prudence, viz : honest frankness, to 
hazard a few additional remarks, suggested by the general terms of 
your letter. 

I need not say, that your course in the administration of your office 
has, as far as I have been personally concerned or personally acquainted 
with it, been, in the highest degree, liberal, and such as to command, 
and, on all proper occasions, to draw forth my acknowledgments. I 
have, at the same time, supposed, that you were not friendly to the 
stability of the Administration ; that your political partialities lay with 
the Vice-President [Calhoun]; and that the patronage of your office 
assumed a corresponding direction. I own I am not in possession of 
facts, which account sufficiently for my having, at any time, such an 
impression. Certainly I have none, which makes it difficult for me, to 
credit your assurance of having pursued a neutral course. For this 
course, you are aware, you have generally had credit — the adminis- 
tration papers, generally, have commended your official character in 
the highest terms ; and when the question of the increase of salary 
was before Congress, the Adm? men were as ready to support it, as 
the Opp° 

I differ from you, a little, as to the extent, to which the members of 
an Administration ought to carry their neutrality. The Postmaster 
Genl. is not, by usage, a member of the Cabinet Council ; but, as 
you justly observe, his functions are as delicate and important as 
those of any officer of the Government, and his patronage probably 
greater. We are now (happily or unhappily ?) in that political con- 
dition, that our parties divide, not on principles as formerly, but on 
personal preferences, so capriciously combined with principles, in 
different parts of the Union, that what aids a candidate in one 
place injures him in another. What then binds the mass of the 
parties together, I say the mass, not the high-minded, few, patriotic 
individuals, — but the mass? Indubitably the hope of office, and its 
honors and emoluments. The consequence is, that the moment any 
Administration is formed, every man out of office, and desirous of getting 
in, is arrayed against it. If the Administration then discard the prin- 
ciple of bestowing patronage on their political friends, they turn against 
themselves not only the expectants but the incumbents. We both prob- 
ably know cases, — I certainly do, — of incumbents, who have actually 
become hostile, on the calculation, that they are safe now, and can make 
themselves so, in the contingency of a change. For an Administration 
then to bestow its patronage, without distinction of party, is to court 
its own destruction. I think, therefore, that Fidelity to itself requires, 
that every Administration should have the benefit of the cordial co- 
operation of all its members. It cannot be supposed, considering how 



nearly equal the parties are in numbers, that there are not good men, 
for any and every service, on the side of the Adm 1 ^ And tho' I would 
apply the general rule, with the greatest possible lenity, in the individual 
case, yet the rule ought to be, that, other things being equal, the friends 
of the Adm? sh'd have the preference. Our present chief magistrate 
[Adams] made the experiment of the higher principle, of exclusive re- 
gard to merit ; and what has been his reward ? A most furious opposi- 
tion, rallied on the charge of corrupt distribution of office, and the open 
or secret hostility of three fourths of the office-holders in the Union. 

I advance these principles, the more confidently, because I under- 
stand, on the whole, that you do not differ from me, on this head, as 
you observe, that " if politics be named, and the parties as to merit &c. 
stand on nearly the same ground, I have in no case failed to select the 
friend of the Adm n " 

But in important cases, nay, in all cases, I should be inclined to 
go further, and be sure, that the candidate preferred was friendly to 
the Administration, that selects him and puts power and influence 
into his hands : for what avails the neutrality of the Head of a depart- 
ment, if a whole army of his dependents are in the field. The con- 
siderations, by which you show, that the P. M. G. should be no violent 
partizan meet my entire concurrence. But do not the same arguments 
show, that his employes should be no violent partizans ? To use your 
own comparison, of which I admit the justice, of what avail would be 
the political neutrality of a judge, if the clerk of the Pleas, the marshal!, 
the lawyers, and the jury in doors, and the mob without stimulated by 
them, were furious partizans, browbeating, chicaning, wronging and 
insulting every person of opposite politics, who came to Court? The 
P. M. G. is not brought directly in contact with the people, he acts 
through his agents; the people judge of him thro' his agents. Take 
the case of Isaac Hill. I have heard, but do not know (and generally 
speaking, I beg you to believe, that I meddle very little with these 
matters), that this man has the chief contract for transporting the mail 
in New Hampshire. What do the farmers (and that is 99/ 100s. of 
the State of New Hampshire) know of the Post Master General ? 
That he employs Isaac Hill to carry the mail in their State, and thus 
gives him the means of distributing a paper [New Hampshire Patriot], 
which is infamous among the infamous, gratis. You may, with all your 
might, aim to preserve a conscientious neutrality. Your personal 
friends may give you full credit for it. But what can all those con- 
siderations, by which you argue the necessity of such a neutrality to 
secure public confidence, avail you, when, after all, you put it in the 
power of a wretch, capable of putting his name to the filthy libel which 
I exposed last winter, to hold himself up as your agent, enabled by you 
to distribute his venom throughout the community. 


I hope you will not understand me to intimate, that you intend to 
afford any countenance to Mr. Hill. I presume you give him the con- 
tract, as the lowest bidder ; but, in my humble opinion, if there be any 
force (and I think there is much) in the arguments by which you 
show that the P. M. G. should not be intimately associated with poli- 
tics, the same arguments show, that the Chief Contractor should not be, 
in any State, the most virulent and unscrupulous foe of the govern- 
ment, of which you are a member. 

Having said so much and so strongly, I believe I may add, with 
Lord Bacon, that I am myself "a friend of moderate counsels." I too 
am no violent partizan. I do not say it invidiously, but as matter of 
fact, that you have found it comparatively easy, to give a preference 
to a neutral course. You have not been obliged, in Congress, to take 
any part in the debates of the day, nor found yourself pursued by a 
pack of unkennelled hounds, let loose upon you, for no other provoca- 
tion, than having defended slandered conscience. I am for mild meas- 
ures, altho' daily insulted and vilified, in the coarsest and bitterest 
terms. I always have been. In laying down the principle, that the 
members of an Adm? ought cordially to co-operate, and that the Gov- 
ernment ought to employ its friends, I am governed by no principle of 
proscription ; but simply by consideration of the nature of man. I 
once saw a letter of Mr. Jefferson to Gov. Langdon, then a private 
citizen of Portsmouth. Mr. Jefferson wanted Gov. L. to name to him 
four persons to be appointed Commissioners of bankruptcy. " Let 
them," said Mr. J., "be all republicans." About three fourths of the 
People of New Hampshire were then federalists, and it may probably 
be inferred that there were 3 to 1 persons of those politics fit for the 
office ; and this office was in its nature judicial. 

Excuse, dear Sir, the freedom and length of these remarks and 
believe me, Dear Sir, with great Regard, Faithfully yours, 

Edward Everett. 

McLean to Everett. 

Washington 8 Augt. 1828. 
Dear Sir, — I have just read your favour of the 1st. instant, and 
lose no time in assuring you, that although I had seen the intimations 

you refer to in the , I did not for a moment believe them to be 

true. It is not in my nature to be suspicious, and especially of persons 
for whom I entertain the most favourable opinion. That you should 
attribute my motives, in writing you, to the cause suggested, may be 
natural enough from our limited acquaintance. But, you will permit 
me to say, that I placed too high an estimate on your good opinion to 
forfeit it, through misrepresentation, without an effort to convince you 
of facts. 


No one can be more sensible than I am, of the liberal manner in 
which I have been sustained by the friends of the Administration, 
generally, and, I have a consciousness, that they have not failed to 
receive my best services. Not one of them can be found, who can in 
truth say, that I have failed to do anything, in my official capacity, 
which was proper to be done, from any indisposition to advance the 
interest of the Administration. On this subject, I have constantly felt 
the most painful anxiety, to omit nothing which duty imposed. 1 

The personal intimacy and friendship which have, for many years, 
subsisted between Mr. Calhoun and myself, denominated by you politi- 
cal, you have supposed, gave a direction to the patronage of my office. 
I will not conceal my mortification at such a supposition. Had it been 
drawn by a newspaper driveller, it would not have attracted my atten- 
tion, but, coming as it does, from a person of high character and intelli- 
gence, you must suffer me to correct the impression. Having been 
long acquainted with Mr. Calhoun, and closely observed his conduct 
during all the emergencies of the late war, it was impossible that I 
could withhold from him, what, at one time, was universally ac- 
corded to him, by the republican party, the highest confidence in his 
patriotism. 2 

1 There are two drafts of this letter. What is given above is the later 
or final form. In the earlier the writer is much more personal, and I give in 
these notes what occurs in the first but was omitted in the second draft. 
At this point McLean said: "In no instance (with a single exception) has a 
candidate for office been recommended to me, as the friend of Gen. Jackson. 
The gentlemen who know me, and belong to the opposition, will not presume 
on such a step. In the case excepted, I threw the letter of the Senator into 
the fire, and conferred the office on the person whose appointment he wished to 

2 The first draft here continued : " and talents. When he became a candidate 
for the presidency, as I knew him well, and was but slightly acquainted with 
Messrs. Clay and Crawford, two of the other candidates, I preferred him to 
either of them on account of his superior talents, his high moral character, and 
his national views of policy. With Mr. Adams I had no acquaintance personally, 
but was induced by representations from a certain quarter to view him as an 
enemy of the West, and consequently I was opposed to him. Of the Ghent 
explosion / had some intimation, some time before it took place. On a full de- 
velopment of this affair, I became convinced that great injustice had been done 
to Mr. Adams, which produced a change in my feelings towards him, and from 
that day to this, I have sought to do him ample justice. This transaction caused 
me to form a different estimate of another distinguished man. Seeing that Mr. 
Calhoun could not be elected, I advised him to withdraw long before he was 
withdrawn, and at the same time declared my preference for Mr. Adams. My 
friends in Ohio supported him. I could have given Gen. Jackson the vote 
of Ohio, without going beyond the limits of the county of my residence. Some 
who are now the rankest friends of the Administration, were then the vilifiers of 
Mr. Adams, and assailed me bitterly for supporting him. After the electoral 
votes were cast, and while the Ohio delegation, were admonished from a certain 
quarter, to stand uncommitted, my opinion was decidedly given, that they ought 


So far from the patronage of my office having in any degree been 
influenced by him, or with a view to promote his ultimate views, I 
declare most solemnly, that such an inclination or motive, never crossed 
my mind. You have fixed the standard, my dear Sir, quite too low. 
Had Mr. Calhoun, either directly or indirectly, intimated a wish or 
hope, that such would be my course ; or had he at any time advised 
the use of the patronage of my office with a view to injure the Adminis- 
tration, it would have terminated at once, our intercourse and friend- 
ship. When I cease to believe him incapable of such a step, I shall no 
longer respect him. 

Before I would lend myself in this manner and prostitute the patron- 
age of my office, I must lose all self-respect, and a thorough change 
must take place, in my views on the subject. I do not recollect of ever 
having consulted Mr. Calhoun on the business of my department. He 
has several times recommended persons for office, but, I believe, that 
I have not made an appointment at his instance. 1 

I regret to find that on the subject of patronage we differ essentially. 
I understand you to say, that you would bestow it exclusively on the 
friends of the Administration, and infer from the cordial co-operation 
required, you would expect every officer of the federal government, not 
only to sustain the general measures of the Administration, but use his 
influence to re-elect the President. Perhaps my inference may go too 
far, but, to the latter condition, there would be found few to assent, 
whose services would be valuable to the public — the former would be 
assented to by every high-minded and honorable man. When a man 
takes office in this country, he neither forfeits his birthright nor gives 
up the guidance of his will. Like the chief magistrate, he is the repre- 
sentative of the people, and enjoys equal privileges beyond the sphere 
of his official duties. 2 

The contest which brought Mr. Jefferson into power, was founded 

to declare in favour of Mr. Adams. This was done. I will not say that it was 
influenced by me, or that I could have prevented it. 

" After the electoral votes were ascertained, Mr. Calhoun was decidedly in 
favour of Gen. Jackson ; prior to that event, his preference, I believe, rather 
inclined in favour of Mr. Adams. From this time I do not recollect that Mr. 
Calhoun and myself have fully agreed on scarcely any prominent public meas- 
ure. Our political connection cannot, therefore, be so close as you seem to 

1 The first draft contained the following at this point : " To promote what may 
be considered Mr. Calhoun's ultimate object, I have taken no step whatever; 
and if you and I live to witness another contest for the presidency, we shall be 
as likely to agree in our preference, as Mr. Calhoun and myself." 

2 From the first draft : " Admit the present contest for the presidency is 
merely a struggle for power. No great principles being involved, it must be 
more a personal than national affair. Had this ground been taken at an earlier 
period of the contest by the leading papers of the Administration, it would have 
been stronger than it now is." 


on a radical difference in principle, on the leading policy of the govern- 
ment. In carrying on the government, he was bound to select such 
agents, as would sustain the principles on which the ascendancy had 
been acquired. Jefferson was only the instrument to secure the victory 
achieved. Any personal advantage resulting to himself, was not direct, 
but consequential. He was pledged, not to support himself, but a cause, 
which had received the deliberate sanction of a majority of the Ameri- 
can people. Had Mr. Jefferson occupied a different position ; had 
there existed no difference of principle between him and his opponents, 
he could not have sustained himself by excluding from office those who 
were opposed to him. 

I profess to know something of public sentiment, and of the genius 
and spirit of the people, and I now predict, that no Administration will 
sustain itself, beyond a single term, which adheres to this exclusive 
policy. One example has been set in the second Administration, and 
the same policy will never fail to produce a similar effect. 

Patronage is a sacred trust, committed by the people, to the hands of 
their agents, to be used for the public benefit. It was never designed 
for the personal gratification of the individual holding it. And if he 
use it with a view of promoting his ambitious schemes, in disregard 
of the public will, he abuses his trust, and is unworthy of the public 

The force of patronage does not consist in buying up or rewarding 
A and B, who may be loud political brawlers — and there will be no 
scarcity of such individuals, if a reward be held out to him. Every 
Administration will be more or less cursed by such supporters, and as 
their numbers increase, and a sanction be given to their proscriptions, 
will it be weakened. This is a rotten foundation, and cannot withstand 
the tempest of opposition. I would found an Administration upon a 
totally different basis. It should rest on the virtue and intelligence of 
the people. The motives of its supporters should arise from pure patri- 
otism and high moral principle. I would never address myself to the 
lower passions of the people. I would excite ambition from high and 
noble principles, as far removed, as possible, from selfish considerations. 
The feeling should be national, not personal. 

If in such a course there be a failure, nothing but office is lost. 
Character, honor, and everything, which a high-minded man can desire, 
are preserved. 

Should the Administration select for office without reference to the 
public will, every appointment will weaken it, by exciting the distrust 
of its opponents and dissatisfaction among its friends, who were unsuc- 
cessful applicants. Each one will be inclined to conclude, that full 
justice has not been done to his merits. All experience proves the 
truth of this position. A preference for office should be founded on 


a different basis, especially where no great principles are involved. 
Qualification, merit and public sentiment, should combine to favour the 
successful applicant. An appointment thus made, will always give an 
encrease of strength to an Administration, by receiving the approbation 
of almost every virtuous and intelligent citizen, and it throws the re- 
sponsibility of the selection, in a great degree, upon the community 
more directly interested in the appointment. The disappointed appli- 
cants will not venture to complain, because they will find few per- 
sons to sympathize with them, whilst every one must admit, that the 
principle which influenced the choice, lays at the foundation of our 

If you will pardon the apparent indelicacy, I would remark, that I 
am indebted to such a course of policy, for any success, which may have 
attended my Administration, of the complicated concerns of the Post 
Office department. My friends advised me strongly against accepting 
the office, and predicted my ruin, in the event of my acceptance. The 
post master general had been long set up as a target, at which arrows 
were constantly flying, from almost every part of the Union. It was 
considered the least desirable office in the country. But, entertaining 
the same confidence in the justice, intelligence and virtue of the people, 
which I still feel, I did not hesitate to accept the office, and the result 
has confirmed me in the correctness of my opinion. 

Much may be done by an Administration, in giving a proper direction 
to public sentiment, though it should be rather followed than controlled. 
If a principle of favoritism be introduced, the struggle for office will be 
perpetual, and no higher motive will influence the combatants. Politi- 
cal integrity will be let down within the grasp, of the lowest political 
intriguer. In such a contest, the public interest will be lost sight of, in 
the scramble for promotion. The characters of our best men will be 
sacrificed, at the shrine of party, and a deep distrust of the uprightness 
of public agents will be produced in the minds of the people. A course 
of continual excitement like this, will produce weariness in the public 
mind, and eventually, any change will be sanctioned, which is likely to 
bring relief. In this way would the history of our liberties be brought 
to a close, and thus would perish, perhaps for ever, the best hope of 

Patronage gives a powerful influence only, when it is properly used. 
The moral force arising from a deep conviction in the public mind, that 
patronage is used with a single eye to the public interest, will be over- 
whelming. It will enlist on the side of the Administration, the feelings 
of every good man. It will embody moral power, which cannot be 
shaken, by the low intrigues and fiery opposition of office hunters. 

To embody such a power, time is requisite. Its growth may be 
slow, but it is sure. The Administration must first lay the foundation 


in its acts, and then build the superstructure. It must win its way to 
the public confidence, not by emblazoning the characters and high 
qualifications of the incumbents, but by a series of public acts, which 
afford convincing evidence, that the powers conferred, are faithfully 
exercised, for the public benefit. An opposition, by its violence, may 
present, at the first onset, many discouragements to a perseverance in 
this course. At this point, the firmness of the Administration is put to 
the severest test. The obstacles to be encountered are very formidable 
in appearance, but they are so, only in appearance. Every increased 
degree of violence will more certainly seal the fate of the opposition. 
But, if the position be abandoned by the Administration, it launches 
into a sea of troubled waters. It is liable to be attacked from all 
quarters, and must return gun for gun. Having relinquished an 
impregnable stand, the result of the conflict may, at best, always be 
considered doubtful. 1 

Whatever may be the result of the present contest, I shall have the 
consolation to know, that I have, in no respect, done injustice to any 
individual. I have regretted as much as any oue the course of violence, 
as well ou account of the great injustice done to individuals as to the 
character of the country. 2 

I will close this tedious letter, by a reference to a case named by 
you, as illustrative of the principle you lay down. 

Mr. Hill's mail contracts were made during the pendency of the late 
contest for the presidency. He was, as you are aware, a warm parti- 
san of Mr. Crawford, to whose election I was opposed. It will not 
therefore be supposed, that in this case, I could have felt any political 
bias in favour of Mr. Hill. 

Knowing that Mr. Crawford was not my choice, he came to Wash- 
ington expecting to encounter strong prejudices, but he soon discovered, 

1 From the first draft : " I admit with you that the President has beeh assailed 
with unmeasured violence. No means have been left untried to destroy his 
public and private character." 

2 From the first draft: " Every personal consideration that could influence me, 
would induce me to wish the re-election of Mr. Adams. And from the impres- 
sions which you have evidently received, it may somewhat surprise you to learn, 
from my own pen, that I have never, even in my most confidential intercourse 
with my personal friends, on both sides of the contest, expressed any wish, or 
attempted to exercise any influence, in opposition to such a result. From the 
opposition I have nothing to hope. However high I might stand in the confi- 
dence of some of them, it would be folly in me, among the numerous expectants 
of office, to look for a more eligible position than the one I now occupy. Indeed 
if there were no objection on account of qualification, there are but two places in 
the cabinet, for either of which I would consent to exchange my present office. 
I will frankly confess, that I have no great' anxiety to see the doctrine of 'safe 
precedents ' extended, though I do not view this as at all likely to result from the 
re-election of Mr. Adams. There are exceptions, you know, to the best rules." 


that he stood on the same footing as every other responsible bidder. 
His bid was accepted, where it was the lowest, and on no other condi- 
tion. Could any rule be substituted ? If in matters of contract, which 
do not depend upon the discretion of the Post Master General, he were 
to respect only the bids of those who are friendly to the Administra- 
tion, it would prostrate the strongest Administration this country has 
ever seen. I am aware that you would not sanction a rule so unjust, 
and so destructive of all confidence in the government. 

Contracts are always made with the lowest responsible bidders, as 
was done with Mr. Hill. He is now engaged in a decided opposition 
to the Administration, but strictly performs his contracts. By the 
terms of his contracts, he has a right, which is reserved to the con- 
tractors in almost all the contracts in New England, to carry and dis- 
tribute newspapers out of the mail. This reservation reduces the price 
of transportation, it is believed, more than would be the amount 
received for postage, on the newspapers distributed. If I understand 
you correctly, you would hold the Post Master General responsible for 
the political acts of contractors. You surely have not reflected on the 
case put. What influence can the Post Master General exercise ? He 
has no hold but that which the contract gives him, and if he were to 
attempt to exercise any control beyond this, would he not place himself 
in a ridiculous attitude before the public, and like all other similar 
attempts in an officer, would it not have a powerful effect against the 
Administration. Such a course may sustain a petty corporation, or, for 
a short time, a state administration, but it will be political death to any 
Administration of the general government. 1 

Where there is an abuse of the trust by a post master, or a violation 
of the contract, by a contractor, the Post Master General is bound to 

1 From the first draft : " The opposition in New Hampshire, and especially of 
Mr. Hill, to the extent shown, may be traced to a prescriptive policy, in printing 
the laws of Congress. And no change has been made of a similar kind, which 
has not produced a similar effect, though generally of a more limited extent. To 
these effects I refer as affording a striking illustration of the truth of my position. 
I am aware that other causes may have contributed to give strength to the oppo- 
sition in New Hampshire, but, the act referred to, has been a principle cause. 
Before the late Presidential election, several of the western papers in which the 
laws were printed, assailed the then secretary of state, with the utmost violence. 
He made no change. By this forbearance he gained much. Had he prescribed 
those papers, he could not have been elected President. 

" Among all the late candidates for the Presidency, with whom I was 
acquainted (and I was personally acquainted with all of them except Gen. Jack- 
son) not one pursued a more unexceptionable course than Mr. Adams. Clay, 
Crawford and Calhoun, men in the field of active exertion, no one of them did 
less, personally, than he, to promote his election before the people. The modesty 
and dignity of his deportment, on that occasion, commanded my respect and 
has always received my highest approbation." 



correct it : And without the fear of contradiction, the fact is stated, 
that on examination, it will be found the proper corrective has been 
applied, where the abuse was known to the department. 

When I commenced writing, I had no intention of afflicting you with 
so long, and, I fear, so uninteresting a letter. But, I hope you will see 
a satisfactory apology in the evidence it affords, of the high value I put 
upon your good opinion. I am anxious that we should think alike on 
this subject. The views given, correspond with those entertained 
by — ■ — x and many others, of the most distinguished and experienced 
men, with whose acquaintance I am honored. If I mistake not, the 
authority of Washington may be quoted, and the express sanction of 
Mr. Jefferson, so far, at least, as an abstraction from all interference in 
elections by the officers of the general government. 

Making the proper allowance for the principles involved iu Mr. Jef- 
ferson's policy, his sanction might be claimed, I have no doubt, to the 
full extent of the principle. Even the late Mr. Pitt, in the interreg- 
num which took place in his official course, on being charged in the 
House of Commons with having made changes in offices, for political 
purposes, beyond the cabinet, denied the charge and disavowed the 
principle. But, if such changes had been made in that government, its 
principles and practice, are so dissimilar to our own, that no precedent 
of any authority, could be drawn from it. W 7 ith very great regard I 
am, dear sir, truly yours 

John McLean. 

Everett to McLean. 
(Private.) Boston, 18 Augt. 1828. 

Dear Sir, — Your letter of the 8th reached me yesterday, and so far 
from finding it tedious or uninteresting, I read it with great eagerness : 
with pleasure at every coincidence of opinion between us, and with re- 
gret at every point of difference, as disclosed in your remarks. A few 
things seem, in justice to myself and to my argument, (if such it can 
be called) to require explanation; and for this purpose, I beg leave 
again to trouble you. When I said in my former letter, that " I had 
supposed your political partialities lay with the V. President, and that 
the patronage of your office assumed that character," I confessed to you, 
that I was not in possession of facts, that justified sucli an impression. 
I certainly also intended to say nothing that would cause you mortifica- 
tion, nor to intimate that your standard of political conduct was "low." 
I ascribed to you that conduct, which almost every man, in public life, 
consciously or unconsciously pursues ; that conduct, to which I con- 
ceive every member of the opposition, in the Senate of the U. S., who 
voted for the present printer to that body, gave his sanction ; that con- 

1 From the first draft : " The late President, Mr. Monroe." 


duct, which the leading presses friendly to Genl. Jackson boast that he 
will pursue, if elected ; and which he certainly will pursue, in reference 
to the highest offices of the government at least. 

Your attachment to Mr. Calhoun, whether personal or political, was 
perfectly natural. There is not more than one individual in the country 
to whom my feelings have been more enthusiastically favorable. Yet, 
although I habitually task myself, not to let political opposition affect 
my estimate of the characters of men, I feel that my attachment to him 
has been shaken, by the events of the last four years. 

On the subject of patronage, I believe, that could we direct our at- 
tention, at the same moment, to the same proposition, our judgments 
would more nearly coincide than they seem to. All that I contended 
for, in principle, was this, that cceteris paribus, a member of the Adm? 
ought to prefer one friendly to it, in all appointments. This rule, in 
your former letter, you avowed, as that which governed you. Now is 
there an office, in your gift, has there been one, for which friends of the 
Administration could not be found, as well qualified as opponents ; or if 
not as well, yet well enough, for this is as far as we need go in human 
affairs ? 

I do not think that you make out the case of Mr. Jefferson, to be 
different from that of other Administrations. I will not claim any 
advantage from his famous sentiment, in the inaugural speech ; but will 
grant, that the Republicans and federalists differed in principle. Why 
did Mr. J. (even in local appointments, and in opposition to the princi- 
ples of those immediately concerned) prefer republicans ? You answer, 
correctly, because he conceived the majority of the people of the U. S. 
preferred Republican principles, and wished them to guide the affairs of 
the Nation. But how does the case differ, supposing the parties to be 
personal ? Somebody is President ; that President is elected by the 
majority of the People ; altho' there be not the choice of Principle, 
between him and his competitors, there is a choice on some points (they 
may be more personal) ; but whatever the point of view, it is the will 
of the People, that he should be the Head of the Adm" Now it can 
be as strongly argued, that the people wish his friends to hold office 
under him on the ground that they are his friends ; as that they wished 
Republicans to hold office under Mr. Jefferson, because he was a repub- 
lican. I believe I may submit it to your candor, whether General 
Jackson's friends, as a party (and if he is chosen, then the majority of 
the People) do not wish, and expect, and will not demand an exclusive 
appoiutment of his friends. I have it, on the highest evidence the 
nature of the case admits, that such will be the course in this part of the 
country. What argument drawn from the declared will of the people, 
in favor of republicanism in Mr. Jefferson's case does not hold of the 
declared will of the people, in favor of any other candidate? The 


people may have decided on lower grounds, and on less important dis- 
tinctions, between candidates. But seeing they have decided, I cannot 
conceive, that any man can wish, for instance, to have Genl. Jackson 
president, rather than Mr. Adams, and not wish cceteris paribus, that a 
friend to the Genl. should hold an office, rather than a friend of Mr. 
Adams. This is rendered still more probable by the fact, that men's 
minds appear to be as earnestly embarked in this struggle, as they were 
in 1800. Genl. Harrison told a company, of which I was one, that "if 
he did not think Genl. Jackson would hang up the rascals, at Wash- 
ington, the day he got there ; if he believed he would give them a trial, 
he would not support him." This coarse and intemperate language 
could come only from a low source ; but I take it the proscriptive prin- 
ciple, on which it proceeds, will be adopted by the new Adm n , if a new 
one there be. 

One reason for it will be, that the contrary policy has failed in Mr. 
A's hands ; — - 1 say has failed, for, whether he is reelected or not, it has, 
in my judgment, done him more injury than anything else, that, in 
making appointments to office, his friends have been neglected, for men 
no better qualified. I know he adopted and has pursued the policy 
from pure motives : but the People will not sustain it. They cannot ; 
it is not in human nature. I think as highly of the virtue, intelligence 
and patriotism of the People as man can. The People have given me 
all I have. To the influential few I am indebted for nothing but cold- 
ness or hostility. But when I see the Presidential question carried into 
the election of municipal officers, in small towns, I cannot think the 
very men, that will not vote for a political opponent, as a hog-reeve, 
wish the president of their choice to advance to high offices men who 
are not of their choice, over the heads of men who are. 

I am not sure, that you rightly apprehended my allusion to the case 
of Mr. Hill. I intended to say, that your principles on the subject of 
neutrality required you to further; That the arguments, by which you 
showed that the nature of your office required you to abstain from 
active electioneering, required that prominent agents under you should 
equally abstain. I did not mean to intimate, that the P. M. G. was 
responsible for the acts of his agents ; but to say that, in a less degree 
but of the same kind, all the evils, which you urge would flow from 
your being a partisan, flow from the violent interference in politics of 
postmasters and contractors. And I instanced Hill's as a strong case 
in point. What you could do in that and other cases, I am not pre- 
pared to say. I think I have seen instructions to custom house officers 
in Mr. Jefferson's days, directing them not to interfere in politics. I 
should cheerfully acquiesce in a rule, which would make any printer of 
a newspaper, incapable of taking a mail contract, — whether friendly 
or opposed to the Adm° 


I agree with you, that no good was done to the AdmP by changes 
in the printing of the laws, tho' I think you overrate the effect of that 
measure in N. H. Still, however, as it was not throughout the policy 
of the Adm n , as much higher game flew unmolested, and as it was done 
without knowledge of circumstances of local expediency, it was ill- 
advised. And yet surely no person in opp n , who thinks of the choice 
of printer to the Senate, can complain, with any face, of the few 
changes made by Mr. Clay. 

You observe that every Administration, but the second (meaning, I 
suppose, Mr. J. Adams') has pursued the policy you recommend, and 
that the second was prostrated for abandoning it. There is no little 
presumption in my differing from you as to a question, rather histori- 
cal in its nature, and on which, you must, consequently, be better in- 
formed, by the few years' difference in our ages. Genl. Washington, 
I take it, was studiously neutral. He tried the experiment of bringing 
into the Cabinet men of opposite principles. It ended in their both 
retiring in disgust. Mr. John Adams, I conceive, aimed to imitate this 
neutral policy. He proposed to Mr. Jefferson to go to France in 1797, 
and actually sent Mr. Gerry in 1799, and his refusal to go all lengths 
with the Ultras of his party, as I think, was what ruined him, and 
them, at least at that time. He had within 57 1 votes as many as Mr. 
Jefferson. Is it too much to assume that the secession of Mr. Pickering 
and the whole Essex Junto in N. England, and Mr. Hamilton, in New 
York, cost him at least votes enough to have re-chosen him ? Had he 
been re-elected, the history of parties would have been essentially 
changed. Mr. Jefferson came in, and adopted the exclusion policy, 
which was adhered to by all his successors, as long as it could be ; that 
is, as long as the line of demarcation between the parties subsisted. 
You urge that principle as Republicans required this of them. Granted ; 
I only maintain, that such is the fact, that they confined their appoint- 
ments to their political friends. 

At the close of the war, the temple of the Janus of party was shut, 
in those parts of the country, where parties had raged most violently. 
A real " aera of good feeling " came in. Men reacted from their hostile 
position to each other. General Jackson seized that moment to press 
on Mr. Monroe a disregard of party, in the composition of his Cabinet, 
and a fortiori in all his appointments. Mr. Monroe steadily declined, 
on the ground that the Republican party w'd be aggrieved by the ele- 
vation of federalists. No personal parties had then been formed. In 
proportion as they were formed, I have always understood, that ap- 
pointments were made, under the various influences of his Cabinet. It 
' so happened, that three of its members were candidates, and if appoint- 

1 Why these figures appear in the manuscript draft is not known. Seventy- 
three electors voted for Jefferson and sixty-five for Adams. 


ments were not made, other things being equal, accordingly as these 
candidates severally had the nomination and recommendation of them, 
public opinion has been much at fault. Of one of the candidates, Mr. 
Crawford, whose friends labored hard to appropriate to themselves the 
character of the Republican party, it was publicly proclaimed, that he 
would sweep the offices if elected. Mr. Randolph gave this as his rea- 
son for supporting him; and in this part of the country, the persons, 
who were to succeed the incumbents, even down to very subordinate 
places, were freely named. The same, I may add, is done now ; and 
ridiculous as it may seem, the schism, which has recently taken place in 
the Jackson party in Boston, and the erection of a new Paper has 
grown out of rival pretensions to vacancies yet to be. 

Such appears to me the history of patronage in this country ; and I 
must confess, it appears to be the natural and necessary course of things. 
I have been astonished to find how our estimate of the merit, talent, 
and even the moral characters of men depends on their agreeing or 
disagreeing with us, in some great object of pursuit. Generally speak- 
ing, there would be a strong natural tendency, in any Administration, 
to appoint its friends to office, because, on principles of human nature, 
it is more likely to believe its friends fit. Do but consider the estima- 
tion in which prominent individuals stand with their own and opposite 
parties; and this, not merely in the case of old party associations, that 
have grown into second nature, but in defiance of those associations in 
the case of the recent personal factions, which now exist. Your obser- 
vation must point out to you individuals, that evidently and without any 
affectation, stand in the highest repute for talent and merit of all kinds, 
with large bodies of men who, four years ago, thought those very indi- 
viduals drivellers, and vice versa. I make this remark fairly, as being 
equally true, at every point of the political compass ; and I deduce 
from this astonishing facility, with which men learn to think well of 
those who are acting with them, the inference, that, tho' an Administra- 
tion should lay down as its rule detur digniori : it would be likely, in 
most cases, to appoint its friends, in the honest belief, that they were 
the most worthy. 

I must here repeat the qualification, which I made of my proposition, 
in my first letter, which I did not and do not intend as a salve to make 
an odious proposition less offensive, but as a bona fide condition : viz. 
that the friend of the AdmP is to be preferred only, when other things 
are equal. In other words, he is to be the best qualified of the candi- 
dates, or as well qualified as his rivals. Appointments thus made would 
never give dissatisfaction, could men think alike as to merit, and could 
they do justice to their political opponents. You will observe, that this 
application of patronage, which I defend, is essentially different from 
that, against which you argue, and of which you point out the deleterious 



effects: viz. "the buying up or rewarding A. and B. who may be loud 
political brawlers." 

You speak of the principle, on which patronage is bestowed in Eng- 
land. I agree with you, no argument can be drawn from that country 
to this ; but generally speaking, the stronger the executive arm of the 
government, the more liberal it is, and can afford to be, in distributing 
favors. In the Continental despotisms, the Governments ask no ques- 
tions, about the opinions of men, who are candidates for office. They 
appoint those, who will do the work best, well knowing that they dare 
do no mischief, with their opinions. In England, in proportion as the 
Executive is strong, the same course might be expected. In point of 
fact, however, in this last named country, the great strength of the 
Executive is in its patronage, and, I am inclined to think, that patron- 
age is habitually wielded on that principle. We have lately seen Mr. 
Huskisson (believed to have been a kind of paragon in his department), 
obliged to budge for a single vote against the premier, and that on one 
wretched little question ; and still more, (as the duke of Wellington] 
justly told him) in Mr. Huskisson's own view of what was proper ; for 
scarce had he given the vote, but he laid his office at the duke's feet. 
It was 100 years ago the custom to deprive officers in the army of their 
commissions, for any degree of activity against the Ministers. You 
recollect Lord Chatham's losing his cornetcy for this reason. Whether 
the practice is kept up, to the present day, in all its rigor, I do not 
know ; there have been certainly some cases, within our own days, 
among them Sir Robt. Wilson. Nothing but difference in politics 
kept Paley from being a bishop, or has kept Mr. Coke from being 
a peer, or Mr. Brougham from being anything he chose. I do not 
now recollect the disclaimer of Mr. Pitt, to which you refer ; but my 
whole impression, I own, has been that the proscription of political 
opponents was very rigorous in England. 

In this country, according to an ingenious remark of Mr. Canning, 
in one of his election- speeches at Liverpool, office is more important, 
than in England. In England, where families are hereditary, the hered- 
itary family politics are of vast consideration. I question not but the 
Duke of Norfolk takes greater pride, in his exclusion from the House 
of Lords as a Catholic, than the newest made peer does, in his admission 
to it. Besides this, mere Rank is of vast consequence there, and fills 
the utmost ambition of many persons in a large class in Society. Here 
it is unknown. Prodigious accumulations of fortune exist there, con- 
ferring of themselves very extensive influence and power, and making 
mere office a small thing with its possessors. The overgrown naval and 
military establishments open a career, in which the ambitious find scope 
for their talents. In place of all these, we have nothing, to which the 
ambitious can aspire, but office : I say nothing, because all the private 


walks of life are as wide open in England as here, and afford, in that 
country, as well as in this, occupation for much of the active talent of 
the Community. But office here is family, rank, hereditary fortune, in 
short everything, out of the range of private life. This links its posses- 
sion with innate principles of our nation ; and truly incredible are the 
efforts men are willing to make, the humiliations they will endure, to 
get it. You must see more of this, than perhaps any man in the Country. 
The present use I make of the reflection is, that, while the People are 
divided into parties, and while it is of the nature of party association 
to lead men to think highly of their co-partizans, and while office is so 
passionately coveted, no party will sit still and see themselves postponed 
to their opponents in politics. So firmly am I persuaded of this, that 
I have no doubt, that, if Genl. Jackson would now, mutatis mutandis, 
publish a declaration, like that contained in his letters to Mr. Monroe 
in 1817, would state that sh'd he be elected, no person should be re- 
moved, because he was an opponent ; none appointed because he was a 
friend, and, to bring the matter home to the belief of the people, should 
intimate, that he would make Mr. Wilson or Mr. Sergeant his Secretary 
of State, I say I have no doubt, it would cost him every vote out of 

I meant, in some part of this rambling epistle, to have admitted that 
different principles must necessarily govern appointments to office, and 
acceptance of contracts. It does not occur to me, that any qualification 
can, with propriety, be made of the rule of " the lowest responsible 
bidder." But inasmuch as some contracts clothe the contractor with 
power and influence, I see no objection to a general rule, which should 
enjoin all contractors to refrain from electioneering, and specially from 
libelling. This would be equal in its operation ; and practically be more 
likely to favor an opp? than an Adm? For, whatever be the case at the 
present day, generally speaking, the majority of office holders will be 
friendly to the Adm? As a matter of history, I would observe, that, 
while the former parties existed, and in the only part of the country to 
which my observation extended, contracts were given only to political 
friends. But with great deference to the Adm n of those days — Mr. 
Madison's, I believe it was a false policy as well as an unsound 

Permit me an allusion to your own case, in pursuance of that, which 
you have, with great propriety, made yourself. I ascribe the eminent 
success, which has attended your Adm n mainly to the talent, zeal, in- 
dustry, and integrity which you have brought to the office, and to the 
consequent prompt and vigorous discharge of its duties. For this 
reason, the Adm° party forgives you for not being of them ; and the 
opp n still more forgives you for not being of them. Some one or two 
high officers of the Gv't may perhaps at all times be able to stand, on 


this high and enviable neutral ground. But so long as we must have 
parties, and so long as office is the object of the mass of parties ; (I 
again except, as in my former letter, the high miuded and liberal few), 
it would stop the wheels of government, if any considerable number of 
its bigh officers should assume the same grounds. The thing is in the 
first place physically impossible, the officers of the Gov't must, by the 
laws of the human mind, think and feel with one of the parties ; and 
secondly, if it were physically possible, it would be logically inconsist- 
ent, with what is the previously admitted state of facts ; for a condition 
of things, in which each high officer of the government, and each man 
of talent in Congress, should be of no party, would destroy all party ; 
and that (however devoutly to be wished), we begin by admitting to be 
impossible. It is, I believe, a well known fact, that the state of things 
in Mr. Monroe's Cabinet, during his second administration, would if 
continued, have brought things to a stand. Every body, as far as the 
President was concerned, was neutral. It was not the interest of any 
party to support him, and consequently no party did support him. 

I would finally observe, that there is scarce any high office, except 
your own, in which a confidential political relation between the head 
and the subalterns is not necessary to a faithful discharge of its duties. 
What could a President do, if his Cabinet were unwilling to support 
him ? What could he and his Secretary of State do, if the foreign 
ministers, at important courts, were indifferent to the success of their 
policy ? 

Should the time ever come, when party shall cease, when all men 
shall be just to all men, when the only questions asked of candidates 
will be, " are they honest, are they capable, are they faithful to the 
Constitution," no one would rejoice more than I. This or the nearest 
practicable approach to it, is the only state of things, in which I can 
prosper politically, having neither taste, nor talent for the duties of a 
partizan. Excuse this prolix and not very pointed replication, in which 
I find, on reading it over, that some things have crept in, that had 
better been omitted, and more are left out, that ought to have been 

I remain, Dear Sir, with high regard, Faithfully Yours, 

Edward Everett. 

McLean to Everett. 

Washington, 27 Aug. 1828 
Sir, — Your very interesting letter of the 18th instant, was received 
a few days ago, and I have perused it with great attention. So entirely 
do my public duties engross my time, that I cannot hope to present any 
views, on the subject of our correspondence, which will interest you. 
But I will venture to try your patience, in reply to some of the posi- 



tions taken, in your highly esteemed favour : and I do so with the more 
pleasure, because I am convinced, that the most inveterate political hos- 
tility, frequently arises, between individuals, from a misconstruction of 
each other's acts and motives, when a right understanding would unite 
them in friendship. 

I was not prepared for a statement, in substance, that " an adherence 
to the liberal policy which I approve, in the use of patronage, had done 
Mr. Adams more injury than any thing else"; and that "if he should 
fail in his re-election it may be attributed to this cause." 

It really gives me concern, that you or myself should be so much 
mistaken on this point. I will not assume directly the contrary and 
say, that his failure, if he shall fail, will be owing to a proscriptive 
policy, because that would be doing great injustice to Mr. Adams, so 
far as his own judgment has been consulted. 1 

But, after the organization of the administration, I ask you to name 
one appointment, of high political importance which has been made, of 
a person who was not a friend to the Administration. Mr. Poinsett, I 
admit, was nominated to Mexico, but that seems to have been the neces- 
sary result of the state of things which existed when Mr. Adams came 
into office. If an appointment of political importance has been made, 
of an individual who was not professedly friendly to the Administration, 
I have, at this time, no recollection of it. As to collectors of customs 
and other officers, whose term of office expires every four years, their 
appointment follows as a matter of course, if their duties have been 
faithfully discharged. Such has become the settled practice of the 
government, and a failure to re-nominate them would be tantamount to 
a removal from office; and if without cause, would afford ground of 
objection against any Administration. Besides, an Administration in 
its first term, cannot feel a very strong disposition to establish the pre- 
cedent, that four years faithful service in office, give no claim to a 

The policy of those who are most intimately associated with the 
President, contributes as much, and sometimes more, to form the char- 
acter of ihe Administration, than the acts of its head. Indeed all the 
official acts of the members of the Cabinet, are presumed to have the 
sanction of the President, as these officers derive most of their powers 
from him. 

Whatever your impressions may be on this subject, and however 

1 There is also an earlier draft of this letter, in which the following was in- 
serted at this point: "I do not feel myself at liberty to speak fully of his first 
and most important step, but I may say that he did not select persons to fill the 
vacant places in his Cabinet, from his original friends. Ead he looked among 
them, he would have found, at least as able men as he did select, and who united 
as large a share of the public confidence." 


unjust to Mr. Adams the imputation may be, the fact is so, that a deep 
conviction is made upon the public mind, that almost all the appoint- 
ments, since the commencement of the Administration, have been made, 
with a reference to political effect. You will not understand me as 
giving now, or as ever having given, a sanction to this imputation ; 
but the fact of its existence, is as clear as the sun at noon. And I 
will go farther and say, that it is this conviction, which has been 
deeply and widely made, that affects most injuriously, the cause of the 

Without any vain pretensions, I think I may venture to state the 
fact, that there is no person in the country, who knows more of the 
public sentiment than myself. I see it in detail, and do not rely on 
the editors of party newspapers. A reliance upon them, for the state 
of public sentiment, will lead into error, unless both sides are examined 
and the individual possesses means of information independent of the 
gazettes. 1 

A few prominent appointments, which need not be designated, have 
conduced to fix the above impression. Seeing things in the above 
light, and as they really exist, you may judge of my surprise at your 
remark, that the liberal policy had failed in the hands of Mr. Adams, 
and that he had pursued it to a dangerous extent. 2 

I am aware that Mr. Adams had a difficult task to perform, and 
I have never ceased to feel, the most ardent desire, to avoid everything 
in the discharge of my official duties, which could make his way more 

I agree with you perfectly, that all things being equal, the friends of 

1 From the first draft: "Entertaining the above opinion, you may judge of 
my surprise at [that] your impression is so widely different from mine, as to 
apprehend that the Administration has failed to pursue a power which only could 
sustain it, that in the estimation [of] a portion of the country, has been carried 
by it, to a ruinous extent." 

2 From the first draft: " If your remark was intended to refer to the original 
friends of Mr. Adams, and not to the new T and zealous supporters of the Adminis- 
tration, I admit its accuracy in a limited view. Of all the appointments made in 
the West, with the exception of Mr. Cook, not one of Mr. Adams' friends, that 
I can now recollect, has been included. They, have been treated with cold indif- 
ference and neglect, while the new converts have been taken, not because they 
were better qualified and possessed a larger share of the public confidence, but 
because their claims were presented through a more influential agency. This 
success of a certain class, and apparent proscription of another, caused great 
exultation and vain boasting by the favoured party, which a short time ago was 
systematically and violently opposed to Mr. Adams. That this course was not 
calculated to encrease the attachment of his first and best friends, you will 
readily admit. That it was not calculated to elevate the character of the Presi- 
dent must also be admitted, for the influence was attributed to a particular 
source, and the credit of magnanimity was not given to him by many who 
supported the Administration." 


the Administration should have the preference for office. On this rule 
I have acted, and am not conscious of having, in a single instance, 
deviated from it. 1 

In no instance have I disregarded the public will, because it is with 
me, a matter of principle not to do so. 2 

You seem to think that the policy of the Administration should be 
the same, in reference to patronage, whether the object be to sustain its 
members in office, or in support of great and vital principles, with 
which it is identified. That the difference being now personal, involv- 
ing no important principles, the friends of the administration should be 
selected, on account of their personal preference, as exclusively, as were 
the friends of republicanism selected in the days of Mr. Jefferson. In- 
deed, so fully confirmed are you in the correctness of this position, that 
you declare no Administration can sustain itself, by the liberal course, 
until all party feeling becomes extinct. And you say that Washington 
suffered by pursuing this policy, and that it proved ruinous to the 
Administration of the elder Adams. 

Do you not mistake your position ? Towards the close of his Admin- 
istration, Washington was undoubtedly too much under the influence of 
Hamilton and others, who were more than suspected of being inimical 
to a government, founded upon mutual rights. In so far as this in- 
fluence operated, or was suspected to operate, discontent with the Ad- 
ministration was felt and expressed. 

That the successor of Gen. Washington practised upon this policy, 
to any considerable extent, is new to me. I can see no evidences of it 
in the history of his Administration. He certainly permitted some 
who were unfriendly to his re-election, to remain in office, but did he 
appoint any such, except Mr. Gerry? The offer to send Mr. Jefferson 
to France, was a most injudicious step ; and leads me to doubt, very 
strongly, whether the President possessed all the essential qualifications 
for his station. It is not enough that he be learned, eloquent and ex- 
perienced. He must possess from nature that which he cannot acquire 

1 From the first draft : " The appointment at Philadelphia I have explained to 
you. It may not be improper for me here to avow the fact, that I have been 
more cautious, and in some instances have gone farther, in the appointment of 
the friends of the Administration, than I would have done under more favourable 
circumstances. Had it not been for the peculiar position I occupied, I should 
have been assailed, and violently too, for these appointments." 

2 From the first draft: " But I made several appointments in New York, last 
winter, against the decided recommendation and personal solicitation of the 
member from the district, aided by expressions of public sentiment, at least as 
strong, as those in behalf of the successful applicants. The friends of the Ad- 
ministration were preferred, and I was saved from attack, I have no doubt, by 
the strength of my position. It was not the interest of the opposition to assail 
me, though they had nothing to expect from my department, but justice to the 
claims of their constituents." 


by study, and which experience will not give him. His mind must be 
well balanced, his judgment clear and decided ; he must be a profound 
judge of human nature, and intimately acquainted with the various in- 
terests of the country. What would be thought of the present incum- 
bent, had he offered a foreign mission to Gen. Jackson. Had the elder 
Adams pursued his own dictates of justice, and been less under the in- 
fluence of Pickering and Hamilton, his administration would have been 
sustained. He yielded to these persons and others, until the course of 
the Administration became violent and proscriptive. Some of its op- 
ponents were arraigned under a sedition law, enacted for the purpose 
of silencing opposition, bdfore obsequious political judges, and were 
incarcerated in prisons or punished in some other manner. Some were 
sent, or attempted to be sent, out of the country, and a remonstrance 
made by a foreign minister against the emigration of Irishmen, on ac- 
count of the turbulency of their character, and the fact of their gener- 
ally taking sides against the Administration. These afford evidence of 
any thing but liberality. 

Pickering was desirous of going still further, and because the Presi- 
dent would not go with him, a difference and separation took place. 
Had the President yielded to the suggestions of this partizan, he would 
have lost his character with his office. Indeed the nomination of judges, 
which was among his latest acts, cannot be justified on any correct 

It was the violence and injustice, and not the moderation of this Ad- 
ministration which brought it to a close at the end of its first term. 

You know Mr. 1 much better than I do, but my acquaintance with 

him is sufficient to know, that he does not possess the necessary qualifi- 
cations, to fill some of the high offices to which he was appointed. He 
is a man of much more than ordinary intelligence, of some acuteness, 
great industry and experience in business. But he does not possess 
a sufficient grasp of mind for the more important executive appoint- 
ments. His feelings are contracted and violent, liable to become ex- 
cited by the most trivial incidents, and his judgment has always been 
influenced more or less by his passions. 2 

Mr. Madison was compelled to make his selections to office, somewhat 
exclusive, not from personal considerations but to sustain the war, and 
the principles of the republican party. A specimen of ultra party feel- 
ing, was given by the opposition, during the late war, and I refer to it, 
as illustrative of the policy I oppose. They were unsuccessful because 

1 The earlier draft gives the name of Pickering. 

2 From the first draft : " He never possessed much force of intellect, and 
could never elevate himself above the heated partizan. As a thorough going and 
orthodox Catholic bishop, he would, at least in former years, have acquired more 
character, than as Secretary of State." 


they acted systematically and exclusively on party principles. The 
distinction between right and wrong was disregarded — the interest and 
glory of the country were not suffered to come in competition with the 
war of party, which they waged. Victory they seemed to think was 
almost within their grasp, and they were willing to grasp it, at any 
sacrifice to this country. Here, at least, Pickering was not checked in 
his career of party, and it ended as every such race must end, in a sig- 
nal disappointment. Had a course of moderation been pursued by the 
opposition, during this eventful period, the republican party would have 
been prostrated. To the violence of its opponents, this party was more 
indebted for its triumphs, than its own judicious conduct. 1 

In the above remarks I do not refer to the great body of the opposi- 
tion party, but to some of those members of it, who were actively en- 
gaged in public life. Our government is founded upon the popular 
will, and it can only be successfully administered, by a constant recur- 
rence to the principle on which it rests. Suppose one third of the peo- 
ple were monarchists, it would be the duty of the two thirds to elect a 
President favorable to their own principles, and who would administer 
the government in conformity thereto. An administration under such 
circumstances, would be bound in justice to its own principles, to place 
political power in the hands of republicans. 2 

But suppose an Administration comes into power by a mere personal 
preference, there being no important principle involved in the election, 
in what manner shall the government be administered ? Shall the 
President look only to his personal friends and supporters in making 
appointments, where they possess the requisite qualification ; or shall 
he consider himself the chief of the nation, and recognize no other dis- 
tinctions among applicants for office than those which are founded upon 
qualification, merit and the public will. 

I understand you to recommend the former policy where there is 
opposition to the Administration; the latter has my decided preference. 

The necessity of the former policy is placed upon a presumption, 
which facts do not warrant. The great body of the people are not 
seekers of office. In the exercise of their suffrages, they are influenced 
by no such motive. In every community, there are expectants of office, 
and some of them may be clamorous at every election canvass ; but they 
will not number more than one to a thousand, when compared to the 
mass of the community. In fact the people in their primary assemblies, 
form the only tribunal against whom sinister motives can never be 

1 From the first draft: " Mr. Madison, with all his science and knowledge in 
diplomacy, was not well qualified for the station he filled, at such a crisis." 

2 From the first draft: " In doing so, it would act in conformity to the public 
will, and as principles which involved the existence of the government were 
concerned, they should be sustained by every legitimate means." 


alleged. Congress, as any body of men selected from the people, may 
be liable to an improper influence — they may look to political advance- 
ment or pecuniary emolument, but a nation of freemen, are too numer- 
ous to be bribed, or influenced by hope of office. The general good, 
which advances the happiness of all, in the primary assemblies of the 
people, must always be the great spring to action. Having no motive 
to do wrong, they can rarely fail to do right. There is no security like 
this, for correctness in human conduct. 

I view it as an axiom in politics, that in all cases, when the people 
can act in their primary capacity, they should do so. The history of 
our government has shown their entire competency, to discharge those 
duties which devolve upon them as electors. In the choice of their 
agents, from the chief magistrate of the union, down to a constable, 
they have generally, if not always elected the individual best qualified 
to serve them. 

There are many functions, the people cannot discharge except by a 
delegation of their powers. This they have done by constituting 
executive, legislative and judicial branches of government. Such are 
the duties committed to the judicial branch that in the discharge of 
them, the public will can seldom if ever be consulted. But the other 
two branches, emanate more directly from the people, and should be 
more under their influence. 

The legislator who does not respect the will of his constituents, will 
find his reward in the loss of their confidence. And a like result, for 
the same thing await the executive power. 1 

The people have a right in their primary assemblies, to prefer A. 
because he is for Adams, and B., who prefers Jackson, because they act 
for themselves, and are responsible to no higher political tribunal. It 
is not so with the agent, who acts by a delegated authority. He must 
look to the interests of his principals, and consult their wishes. His 
powers are to be exercised for their benefit, not his own. 2 

I therefore hold it to be a correct principle, that in all cases of 
appointments, where the public will is clearly ascertained, and the 
individual designated by it is .competent, the executive power should 
conform to it. If I were to appoint A. because he is my personal 
friend, when B, another applicant is the choice of the people, who are 
most interested in the appointment, I disregard the principles which lay 

1 From the first draft : " The appointing power has no right to enquire, when 
the public will is made known, or [on] what reason it is founded, if the office be 
local in its character, and there exists no doubt of the competency of the individ- 
ual, who unites the public suffrage." 

2 From the first draft : " I do not mean in these remarks to refer to cases, 
where an individual, by great efforts has induced a great number of individuals 
to recommend him for office, where his competitors were not known, but to cases 
where no doubt can exist as to tiie public sentiment." 


at the foundation of our government. Such an appointment cannot fail 
to create strong objections against the appointing power. Here is a 
positive loss of strength, in the executive, and what is to compensate 
for it. The individual who is rewarded, not for his merits or public 
services, but for his personal and perhaps interested friendship, becomes 
an object of jealousy, and in the discharge of his duties, he will be more 
likely to increase, than diminish, the dissatisfaction felt at his appoint- 
ment. The unsuccessful applicants, conscious of equal or superior 
merit, united with the public approbation, feel that injustice has been 
done to them ; and the people, who see that their wishes have been 
disregarded, will withdraw their confidence from the executive. And 
if they can be brought to believe, that the officer was induced to make 
the appointment, not only to gratify his personal friendship, but with 
the view of advancing his own interest, they will denounce the act as 
corrupt. And by what other name shall it be designated ! He has 
appropriated to his individual advantage, what he held in trust for the 
public benefit. He prostitutes his trust, to the public injury, from 
motives of self aggrandizement, than which none can be more objec- 
tionable. The tendency of the policy, in so far as it may have an 
influence on the people, is most injurious. It lowers the motives of 
political action, by substituting considerations of a selfish and corrupt- 
ing nature, for those which are of a high character, and essentially 
connected with the public interest. 

An officer has no right to sell the patronage in his hands, like a 
merchant does his merchandise, to the highest bidder. I would make 
little difference between receiving a pecuniary compensation, for an 
office conferred, and a promise, express or implied, of personal service. 
The latter may be often esteemed as more valuable than the former, 
and the motive, it appears to me, is nearly as objectionable in the one 
case as the other. 

If you will pardon the apparent egotism, I will here relate a circum- 
stance, which will shew, that this opinion has not been formed to meet 
the occasion. 

Shortly after I came into the Post Office Department, I received 
a letter from a gentleman of very respectable standing and intelligence, 
soliciting an office which was expected soon to become vacant, and he 
observed, that he understood I had a preference for one of the candi- 
dates for the presidency, and assured me, in the event of his appoint- 
ment, that he would, to the utmost of his power, promote my wishes on 
the subject. This was anterior to the late presidential election. I en- 
closed the letter to the representative of his district, and requested him 
to inform the writer that under no circumstances could he ever expect 
an appointment from me. 

Had I favoured the pretensions of this man, in any form, I should 


have sacrificed self approbation, without which this world and all its 
honors, would present a dreary waste. 

If subserviency to the President, and an ardent zeal in the promotion 
of his personal views, shall be the passport to office, where the individ- 
ual is qualified, however objectionable he may be to the people, offices 
would be filled, not by high minded and patriotic citizens, but by fawn- 
ing sycophants, loud in their professions, without principle, but ready at 
all times to execute the biddings of their master. As the President would 
be looked to, and not the people, more efforts would be made to con- 
ciliate them, than to serve them. This policy, if successful, would end 
in monarchy — it would destroy all harmony in the operations of our 
government. Between the people, and the officers appointed over 
them, there would be a continual conflict. One of the strongest incen- 
tives to a correct and acceptable discharge of duty, by an officer, arises 
from the consideration, that he is amenable to public opinion, and can 
never, with impunity, treat it with disrespect. To place any one above 
this salutary restraint, this high motive, would be contrary to the genius 
and spirit of republicanism. This very principle is the great line of 
separation between parties in this country. Names are nothing, prin- 
ciples are everything. The name of a party may become extinct, but 
its principles may live, and show themselves in a distrust of the intelli- 
gence, the virtue and patriotism of the people ; in a disposition to con- 
centrate power and influence in the hands of the few, to control the 
many ; In a subserviency to power, and in the prostitution of it, to secure 
selfish ends. 

What would be thought of the directors of a Bank, who in the dis- 
tribution of its accommodations, should consider their own interest more 
than that of the stockholders. I admit that the government is not a 
trading concern, and I regret that it should ever, in any point of view, 
be so considered. And especially, that those who are vested with au- 
thority, should consider the places which they temporarily occupy, as 
their exclusive property, to be used for their own advantage. 

Had Mr. Adams pursued what I will call the ultra party policy ; had 
he removed from office all who would not engage actively in support of 
the Administration, which is construed to mean, by many, the re-election 
of the President, and appointed to office none but such persons, the 
Administration would have had more creatures in office, than it now 
has, but fewer friends. I use the word creature, in no other sense than 
to indicate individuals, who have no limit to their willingness and obe- 
dience. Had such a course been practicable, instead of giving strength 
to the Administration, it would have destroyed it utterly. The public 
indignation would have been excited to a degree, that would have 
hazarded the peace of the country. 

At no time from the commencement of Mr. Adams' Administration, 



could he have pursued such a policy, had he been disposed to do so. 
He would have found against him, a majority, in both houses of Con- 
gress. He might have removed from office, but had this been done, of 
officers who faithfully discharged their duty, and who stood high in 
public confidence, the Senate would not have sanctioned new appoint- 
ments. This being the case, it must then appear that Mr. Adams, in- 
stead of losing any thing by this liberal policy, had not the power to 
take the opposite course. 

You are as much mistaken, my dear Sir, about the effect of Mr. 
Adams in this particular, as you will find yourself to be, in the policy 
of Gen. Jackson, should he be elected. Is it possible, you can for a 
moment believe, that he will lend himself and the powers of his office, 
to the miserable caterers for office, who look upon the Treasury of the 
Union as spoil won by their efforts, and to be distributed among them 
as their reward ! 

Of Gen. Jackson I know very little personally. Of the wishes of his 
friends on this subject, I know nothing ; but, sir, I would as soon be- 
lieve in the happening of an impossible event, as that he will be under 
the influence you imagine and pursue the course you apprehend. He 
may, possibly, remove those officers who may have prostituted their 
offices against him, but, I mistake the man altogether, if he have not 
a soul elevated as much above that pitiful resentment which has been 
attributed to him, as the heavens are higher than the earth. I shall be 
disappointed, if he do not exhibit evidences of magnanimity, which will 
flush the cheek of his bitterest enemies. 

Should Jackson succeed, his position will be a strong one. I have 
seen no correct estimate of it by his opponents. They generally con- 
clude that he is supported by office hunters, who must be rewarded, or 
they will desert his standard. Where will they go, if the people should 
be with Jackson ? They rallied in favour of him, not so much because 
they gave him a personal preference over Mr. Adams, as that they be- 
lieved his strong hold on the affections of the people, afforded a ground 
on which they could rally with success. 

In the support of Gen. Jackson, the politicians of the country, did 
not take the first step; they followed the train of the people, at first, 
more to save themselves, than to elect him. From the demonstrations 
of his popularity, at an early period of the canvass, they thought they 
saw the indications of victory, and they flocked to his standard and 
endeavoured to swell his triumph. 

The same course which operated on these politicians, to take the side 
of Gen. Jackson, will keep them there, after his election. 

His position will be infinitely stronger in the nation, than if he rested 
on the politicians of the country. In the latter case, he would have to 
adjust his arrangements to satisfy individuals, ambitious of power and 


jealous of competition. But, in the former, his strength being with the 
people, he can consider their interests, in all his movements. 

A wide distinction exists between the members of the Cabinet, and 
the other officers of the government. There must be unity in this part 
of the executive. The members of the Cabinet are the sustainers of 
the President, and as questions are often, if not generally, decided by 
the concurrence of the majority of them, it becomes the decision of the 
Cabinet, and each member is bound to support it. This is the condition 
on which the office is accepted. But, as other officers of the govern- 
ment are not consulted, and can have no influence in the policy of the 
Cabinet, the same obligation is not imposed upon them. They are 
bound to discharge their duties faithfully, and no honorable man will 
suffer the patronage in his hands, to be used, to obstruct the operations 
of the government; but his opinions are free, and he may express 

I would scorn to hold any office, as a creature of any Administration. 
The Cabinet shall never think and decide for me, unless I am a member 
of it, but, I would avoid, for the sake of my own character, a prostitution 
of official influence. 1 

In England, the King is the source of political power and honor ; in 
this country, these emanate from the people. Here, every officer is 
considered a representative of the people ; in England of the King. I 
would then apply the rule here, that where an officer in his course of 
policy violates the public will, clearly ascertained, it is as incumbent on 
him to relinquish his office, as it is in England, where a high officer 
goes in opposition to the Royal pleasure. Even in England, I believe, 
the rule is not strictly enforced, except against members of the Cabinet. 

In this country, it is contrary to all the ideas I can form of the 
nature of our government, to consider the will of the President, who is 
himself like all the other officers of the government, a representative of 
the people, and takes the same oath to support the constitution and 
discharge his duties, as possessing the force and effect of the royal will 
of England. 

Mr. Huskisson showed a morbid sensibility in his late letter to the 
prime minister, which he certainly afterwards regretted, and which has 
cost him some character. Nothing could be more perfectly ridiculous 
in this country, than such a step by an officer. It would justly forfeit 
him the respect of any individual, of high intelligence and correct 

1 From the first draft : " Mr. Monroe's Cabinet, for the last two or three 
years of his Administration, was divided, three of its members being candidates 
for the Presidency, and each looking to his own interests ; but the Administra- 
tion was able to carry all its important measures and avoid any considerable 
public excitement." 


Before I conclude this desultory scroll, and ray apology for its length 
is, that I have not time to make it shorter, permit me to say a few 
words &C. 1 

Give me the moral force of the country, and I care little about office- 
hunters. This influence, which is the only one worthy of the ambition 
of a high and honorable mind, is to be acquired by the course I recom- 
mend. If I did not believe that the people possess enough of virtue, 
intelligence and patriotism, to sustain this policy, I should despair of 
the permanency of our institutions. They can be perpetuated and 
preserved in their spirit, only by such a course. 

The operations of the Government, instead of letting down the moral 
feeling of the people, should elevate it. Whenever no higher motive 
to political action shall be acknowledged, than a scramble for office, 
aspirants will be indifferent to the means, and the Union will become a 
great electioneering arena, in which every species of fraud and corrup- 
tion will be practised. This would soon loose the ties of our Union, 
and then the destruction of our liberties will be at hand. With very 
great respect I am, dear Sir, truly yours, 

John McLean. 

Everett to McLean. 

(Private.) Boston, 7 Oct? 1828. 

My dear Sir, — Your highly interesting letter of the first of SeptT 
duly reached me, and demanded of me a prompt acknowledgment. I 
was much out of health, when I first got it, and after I became better, 
I forbore for a few days, to answer it, intending to find time, to restate 

1 From the first draft : " As it regards yourself. Your position is an impor- 
tant one, and if rightly improved, may become highly advantageous to yourself 
and your country. 

"After the termination of Mr. Adams' service, 1 know of no man in New 
England, who is now above the political horizon, that can come in competition 
with you, in a career of extensive usefulness. I apprehend the general popularity 
of Mr. Webster is greatly overrated in Massachusetts, and perhaps, in some others 
of the Northern States. 

" With his acknowledged talents, he will never be able to rise, in the public 
estimation, beyond the boundaries of New England. His course during the late 
war will always prove the grave of his political prospects. Indeed his prominency 
in the present contest for the presidency, has been of great injury to Mr. Adams. 
Against you there can be no objections of any weight. The ungenerous and 
contemptible taunts against your late profession, could only proceed from vulgar 
minds, and will be of no disservice. They have heightened, in my feelings, an 
interest in your future welfare. 

" With a spotless character, fine talents and acquirements, clear of political 
inconsistencies, I cannot see anything to impede your future career. I am therefore 
solicitous, believing my views, as it regards a liberal policy, are not only correct 
but just, that you should, at least, not be found in extreme opposition to them." 


and endeavor to strengthen my views of the subject of our correspond- 
ence. Farther reflection has led me to think, as I partly hinted before, 
that we do not differ on the question, while contemplating it under the 
same point of view. In fact, in your first letter to me, you laid down, 
as your own rule, about all I have contended for, in principle, viz. that 
when other claims were equal, you w'd give the preference to a friend 
of the Adm?, as a matter of propriety. I respect the important claims 
on your time and attention too much, and feel the calls on my own too 
constantly, to protract the discussion of what may still remain in con- 
troversy between us. 

I should have confined this letter to the simple acknowledgm't of the 
receipt of yours, but for the kind allusions made to me personally, at 
the close of your last communication, which certainly deserve my sincere 
thanks. The course, which awaits me in public life — of which, with 
a proper reservation, you are good enough to augur favorably, — is 
matter of great uncertainty, but of no great solicitude, in my own mind. 
I almost daily perceive myself destitute of the arts, (some of them honest 
arts), which I feel in greatest request, among the majority of my con- 
temporaries. I also feel — not because I am taunted with it, but because 
I have too much discernment not to feel it, — the disadvantage, under 
which I labor, in having begun life in a profession, so foreign to the 
political career, and in wanting that discipline of the bar, which is so 
useful in a deliberative assembly. What you say, on the first point, 
merits my thanks. It is a satisfaction to me to reflect, that I embraced 
that profession, at an age so tender (I may call it), that even avowedly 
to have abandoned it would not have argued extreme levity of character. 
I was not 20 years old, when, in 1814, I was placed in the ministerial 
charge of the largest church in Boston, as successor to the most popular 
preacher of the day. 1 My health and spirits were instantly crushed, by 
the burden of the office, the duties of which I discharged, with singleness 
of heart, and, as far as I know, irreproachably. In less than a twelve 
month I was, by the Corporation and Overseers of Cambridge College, 
— bodies comprising the most respectable and influential of the clergy 
and laity of the State, — called to a professorship at Cambridge, with 
liberty to travel in Europe. This call I accepted, and was dismissed, 
before the expiration of my minority, from the ministerial connection, 
in which I have never since stood. My furlough was originally granted 
me for my health. Finding this to be rapidly restored, by relief from 
premature care and labor, and the natural action of a good constitution, 
I devoted myself, with great diligence, to preparations for the duties of 
my professorship, which was that of Greek literature. I meddled in no 
degree, with the pleasures or politics of Europe. On my return, after 
an absence of 4 years and 8 mo. the proprietors of the North American 
1 Rev. Joseph Stevens Buckminster. 


Review, then languishing with a subscription, which did not pay for 
printing it, begged me to undertake the editorship of that work, which 
I did, not merely with the acquiescence, but with the co-operation of the 
authorities of the college. This was, of course, but subsidiary to the 
duties of my office, but it led me incidently to speculations of a miscel- 
laneous and national character. I was led, particularly, to defend our 
country against the attacks of foreign journalists. These pieces, I may 
be permitted to say, were relished by our community. The circulation 
of the work advanced, with a rapidity, at that time, unparallelled, in 
this country, of which, however, I am far from taking all the credit to 
myself. I was naturally encouraged, by what encourages all men, — - 
success and public approbation, — to cultivate the same strain ; and this 
led me into a general course of reading in public law, political history, 
and kindred subjects. The civil law I had already studied, as a branch 
of Roman Antiquities, at a German University. All this time, however, 
I was entirely aloof from politics. I had never, in my life, given a vote, 
in a national or State election. I had no more idea of becoming a public 
man, than you have of becoming an academical one. At length, in 1824, 
Mr. Fuller, 1 my predecessor in Congress, proposed to retire : his pre- 
sumptive successor, tho' a worthy man, was not likely to distinguish 
himself in any way ; and some of my friends were kind eno' to cast 
their tho'ts on me, to take Mr. Fuller's place. This was at first done, 
without any serious belief on their part, and still less on mine, that such 
a thing was practicable. Some editors of newspapers took it up, out 
of friendly estimation of me, but it attracted no notice in the district ; 
which I may observe has long been the stronghold of the stanchest 
democracy of the State. A caucus was called in the usual way, and 
out of 30 votes, 28 were cast for the gentleman to whom I have already 
alluded. This was but a month before the election. At this stage of 
the matter, some young men, most of whom I did not know by sight, 
spontaneously embarked in the project of electing me. They called a 
convection, made a nomination, and, much to my surprise, I was chosen, 
by a very handsome majority, over the regular candidate. When I was 
nominated, it was with the understanding, between me and the President 
of the Corporation of the College (the Trustees), that I should continue 
to hold my professorship, and the friends of the College, (which is in 
my district), supported me. An economical reform in the affairs of the 
College became necessary at this time, and a controversy relative to its 
organization arose, in which — with many of my colleagues — I was 
opposed to the trustees. These two circumstances led to my dismissal, 
under an obsolete law, forbidding a Professor to hold any civil office. 
No breach of good will, however, took place, and, not long after, I was 
chosen one of the Overseers (or visitors) of the College, which office I 

l Timothy Fuller. 


still fill. It is a large body, comprising, among others, the Governor 
and Senate of the Commonwealth. 

Brought then, with as little personal agency, as can well be con- 
ceived, into political life, I shall not be put out of it, by sneers or 
taunts. My conscience is clear, in regard to the change of my career, 
and I am far from anxiety, as to its continuance. I profess no extra- 
ordinary exemption from selfishness, — I know the selfish nature of 
fallen man. But Providence has kindly not made me dependent on 
my political success for bread ; and the competence I have is all I 
want. The natural desire for an honorable reputation, I can gratify 
as well out of public life, as in it. The low game of politics I disdain. 
Its lofty action animates and excites me : and thus far promotes my 
happiness. When it ceases to do so, I have other, earlier, and perhaps 
purer tastes, to the cultivation of which I can with great cheerfulness 

And now, my dear Sir, having troubled you, with a great deal of 
what can be of but little interest to you, I can offer you no other 
apology, than that I thought, from your kind expressions of interest, 
in reference to the principal point treated in this letter, that some 
account of the steps, which had brought me, from a starting point so 
remote, to the floor of Congress, would not be unacceptable to you. 
It is the first time I ever undertook it. Here, almost every thing 
I have stated is matter of notoriety ; and elsewhere, of little impor- 
tance. I presume I need not add, that I am, with great regard, faith- 
fully yours, 

E. Everett. 

McLean to Everett. 1 

Should Mr. Adams fail, I can state to you the causes which will 
have contributed to produce it. The manner of his election and the 
appointment of his first officer [Clay], may be assigned as the most 
prominent cause. Mr. Adams stood high in the nation for moral recti- 
tude, and his acquirements and experience in political affairs, added 
much to his reputation. He might have gotten over the objection of 
being elected by Congress, though he received a less number of votes 
in the electoral colleges, had he not made the above appointment. 
This afforded a ground for his adversaries to assail him, the strength of 
which seems not to have been anticipated. In politics, it is not enough 
that our motives and actions should be pure, they must always be 
susceptible of the most satisfactory explanation to the people. 

Mr. Adams, of all the late candidates for the Presidency, is the only 
one, who could not at the commencement of his presidency, appoint 

1 An undated paper, endorsed " Letter to Everett." 


distinguished federalists to office, without endangering his popularity. 
Crawford or Jackson might have appointed Rufus King to England 
without hazard. Mr. Adams could not. He was already suspected 
by the republican party, and he had no strength to spare on which 
to sustain individuals, however eminent, who had become unpopular 
with the nation. 

Considering his advanced age and consequent imbecility, Rufus 
lying had neither popularity at home nor ability to represent our gov- 
ernment at London. This appointment caused *Mr. Adams to be more 
than suspected of leaning to his federal friends, some of whom, what- 
ever may be their standing in New England, can never have a general 
popularity in the country. 

Calhoun, though opposed to the election of Mr. Adams, under the 
circumstances, had come to the resolution of occupying a neutral posi- 
tion, most suitable to the station he occupied in the government. 
With this determination, which I anxiously endeavored to bring him 
to, he came to Washington to take his seat in the Senate. On his 
way, he heard of the project to send ministers to Panama. Believing 
it would be impolitic to accept of the invitation which was said to have 
been given, he called on a member of the Cabinet, with whom he was 
most intimate, gave him his views fully On the subject, and requested 
that they might be communicated to the Cabinet. He was informed 
it was too late, as the invitation had been accepted. 

This step by Mr. Calhoun showed a friendly solicitude that the 
Administration should take a course which he believed to be correct 
and politic. 

But shortly after the commencement of the session he was violently 
assailed, in the newspapers by one of the members of Congress from 
Kentucky for his appointment of committees, and a determination was 
shown to drive him from a neutral position. It was not intended that 
he should be on friendly terms with the supporters of the Administra- 
tion in the north. This attack was followed up by others, until the 
Vice President was driven to the alternative of a most active and 
persevering opposition to the Administration. 

Too much importance was given to the Panama mission. Public 
expectation was raised too high. I entertain now the same opinion 
that I did of this mission when it was first named. I then stated to 
Gen. Brown that it would involve a considerable expenditure, end in 
disappointment, and that I thought it was impolitic to give it so much 
importance before the people. 

It was the interest of Dewit Clinton to cooperate with the Adminis- 
tration and sustain it. This he was disposed to do. By offering him 
the appointment to London and afterwards sending Mr. King the 
Administration had nothing to hope from the Buctail [Bucktail] party 


of New York. Clinton, by sustaining the Administration, expected to 
conciliate New England. But here, it seems, he was about entering 
on forbidden ground, and a determination was formed either to demolish 
or at least cripple him. This ground had bten taken from the Vice 
President, and it must now be taken from Dewit Clinton. I foresaw 
and predicted to Gen. Brown, long before he or any one else so far as 
I know anticipated it, that by the force of circumstances, and not of 
choice, Clinton would be found in the same ranks with Van Buren. 
Knowing, as Gen. Brown well did, the views and wishes of Governor 
Clinton, he at first believed it was impossible. Very soon, however, 
he had evidence that a movement would be made in opposition to 
Clinton's election, such as I predicted, that was likely to produce the 
above result. Of this movement Mr. Adams knew nothing, and was 
perfectly inuocent. It was, evidently, his interest to conciliate Clinton, 
and I have no doubt it was his disposition to do so. But Clinton's 
popularity would be an obstacle to other views, and he was to be pros- 
trated. This was accomplished, not by defeating his election for 
governor, but by reducing his majority so small as effectually to defeat 
his hopes for the presidency. My prediction was then realized. 
Clinton and Van Buren were seen in the same ranks, and this union 
destroyed the prospects of the Administration in New York. 

These are some of the prominent causes which have originated and 
consolidated by far the most formidable opposition to the Administra- 
tion, that has ever been witnessed in this country. The change of 
positions [?] the appointment of the post master at Nashville, &c, &c, 
have been powerful auxiliaries to give strength and energies to the 
opposition. To the above, and not the liberality of the Administration 
in its appointments, may the causes of failure be found, if a failure 
should take place. 

Remarks were made during the meeting by the President, 
Gamaliel Bradford, and Roger B. Merriman. 




The stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 12th instant, 
at three o'clock, P. m. ; the President in the chair. 

The record of the. February meeting was read and approved ; 
and the Librarian read the list of donors to the Library during 
the past month. 

The Cabinet-Keeper reported the recent additions to the 
series of portraits of Treasurers of the Society, and gave the 
list at the present time as follows : William Tudor (1791-1796, 
and 1799-1803), Josiah Quincy (1803-1820), James Savage 
(1820-1839), Nahum Mitchell (1839-1845), Peleg W. Chand- 
ler (1845-1847), Richard Frothingham (1847-1877), and 
Charles C. Smith (1877-1907), whose portrait is a charcoal 
sketch from life drawn in November, 1907, by Miss Mary N. 
Richardson. He also reported that the Cabinet now contains 
a large number of ancient coins, which are not of particular 
value to the Society, and that the Council had voted that they 
be given to Harvard College. 

George L. Kittredge, of Cambridge, was elected a Resident 
Member of the Society, and Justice James W. Longley, of 
Halifax, Nova Scotia, a Corresponding Member. 

In preparation for the Annual Meeting in April, the follow- 
ing committees were appointed by the President : to nominate 
officers for the ensuing year, Samuel S. Shaw, James De Nor- 
mandie, and M. A. De Wolfe Howe ; to examine the Treas- 
urer's accounts, S. Lothrop Thorndike and Thomas Minns; 
to examine the Library and Cabinet, Albert Matthews, William 
V. Kellen, and William R. Thayer. 

The President reported for the Council a revision of the 
By-Laws, which was referred to a Committee consisting of 
Edward Stan wood, Winslow Warren, and Barrett Wendell. 

The President announced the death of Charles Henry 
Dalton, a Resident Member, and paid the following tribute to 

It is with more than usual regret, and indeed with a 
sense of personal loss, that I have again, as at the last meet- 


ing, to announce the death of a Resident Member. Born at 
Chelmsford on September 25, 1826, Charles Henry Dalton 
died at his residence on Commonwealth Avenue, in Boston, 
on the morning of February 23. Elected a Resident Member 
of the Society on June 9, 1904, Mr. Dalton, owing to a 
somewhat developed and constantly increasing difficulty of 
hearing, had not been a constant attendant at our meetings. 
He served, however, on the Committee to examine the 
Treasurer's Accounts in 1904 ; and at our January meeting, 
1906, he communicated *a paper of considerable historical 
value on United States Postage Stamps, 1 a subject interesting 
in itself, but which had excited peculiar interest in him. Of 
it he had made a study. Beyond this, I cannot find that 
Mr. Dalton was ever present at more than two meetings of 
the Society, — those of December, 1904, and January, 1906. 
Professor R. B. Merriman has been requested to prepare the 
memoir of Mr. Dalton for our Proceedings ; but I know of no 
one in the Society better qualified on the whole than I to pay 
such brief, characterizing tribute to him as is customary 
here when an announcement of this character is made. For 
not only was Mr. Dalton one of my oldest and most valued 
friends, but there was also between us a remote relationship 
as well as a more recent family connection. Our common 
ancestor was Caleb Call of Charlestown (1718-1765), de- 
scribed in the records as " Esquire, baker," one of whose 
daughters married (1763) Nathaniel Gorham, an ancestor of 
mine on the maternal side, while another daughter married 
(1778) Peter Rowe Dalton, the grandfather of our deceased 

My association with the Dal tons of our common generation 
dates back more than fifty years ; and with Charles H. Dalton 
personally, to a time immediately following the close of the 
War of Secession. There were four brothers ; and with all 
of them my acquaintance, invariably pleasant to recall, has 
at times been close and almost intimate. Charles was the 
second of the four ; and from his seniority acted, when occa- 
sion arose, almost in the capacity of a father to the younger 
brothers. John C. Dalton, the oldest, and a Harvard gradu- 
ate in the Class of 1844, served in the Union army as a sur- 
geon. Subsequently he attained eminence as a physiologist 
1 2 Proceedings, xx, 6-12. 


in New York. He died there in 1889. Edward Barry Dalton, 
the college roommate of Phillips Brooks in the Harvard class 
of 1855, also followed the medical profession ; and in the War 
served with great distinction as head of the Reserve Hospital 
of the Arm}^ of the Potomac. Later, he also practised his 
profession in New York. He died of tuberculosis in Cali- 
fornia in 1870. The youngest brother, Henry R., alone of the 
four, survives. 

As a man gets'on in life, and is at least supposed to have, 
like Ulysses, 

roaming with a hungry heart 
Much to have seen and known ; cities of men 
And manners, climates, councils, governments, 

of such an one, I say, the question is often asked, who, among 
those he has met or been associated with, have impressed 
him as most noticeable, most individually interesting. The 
answer frequently affords additional illustration of the familiar 
aphorism that the world knows nothing of its greatest men. 
In nine cases out of ten, when the question is asked, the 
person- to whom it is put replies by naming some one never 
before heard of by the questioner, — some professional or 
business associate, some relative, or some village philosopher 
of local fame only, whom the person interrogated has met, 
and had occasion to observe in his immediate circle. In the 
present case, were the question asked me, I should place 
Charles Henry Dalton high among the strong and really 
noticeable characters with whom, in the experience of life, it 
has been my fortune to come in contact. I do not hesitate 
to say that, as this world goes, I think Mr. Dalton would have 
been equal to any position calling for the exercise of master- 
ful executive ability in which he might have found himself 
placed. Not only was he a man of character in the full sense 
of that vague but expressive term, but he was also essentially 
public-spirited ; and, when duty or the occasion called, not 
only was he willing, but he was very capable. A man of 
large business experience, he understood himself as well as 
others ; and, understanding himself, he impressed his individ- 
uality on all with whom he came in contact. I first came in 
close connection with him when, a man of some forty years of 
age, he was in the maturity of his powers — shrewd, active, 


alert, energetic and clear-headed. As such he had won recog- 
nition and achieved his position. Not only was his executive 
and business capacity generally appreciated, but his character 
and high standard of public spirit had won recognition. If 
called upon to fill the position, Mr. Dalton would, in my 
judgment, have made an almost ideal mayor of Boston or 
governor of the State ; and, as head of a department and 
member of the Cabinet at Washington, he would have been 
invaluable. In fact, I know of no position calling for clear- 
ness of thought, strong common sense, and executive faculty 
combined with that peculiar influence which the possession of 
character gives, which Mr. Dalton could not have filled far 
better than nine out of ten of those it has been my fortune to 
meet with in such places. He was, for instance, one of the 
younger men to whom the late John M. Forbes was in the 
custom of having recourse in any matter requiring the faculty 
of accomplishing results ; and in the course of my life I have 
met few who were better judges of instruments of that sort to 
do the work in hand than John Murray Forbes. 

There was, moreover, a finer trait very noticeable in Mr. 
Dalton's make-up, and which, indeed, led to his election into 
this Society. Though not a college-bred man, he had a de- 
veloped literary taste, which, however, never found large utter- 
ance. He felt no call to letters ; but, the head of the family, 
this subordinate and latent faculty of literary expression mani- 
fested itself unmistakably in two papers prepared by him for 
the amusement and information of the circle which it was 
his custom to gather about his table when the Christmas period 
came round. These papers he entitled, the one (1903) "A 
Wintersnight Tale," and the other (1904) " A Christmas Eve 
Family Story." Through them runs a truly charming vein of 
narrative and reminiscence. Simple, unaffected, going straight 
to the point, they are redolent of the soil, and over them is 
the New England atmosphere. Copies of them are now in the 
Library of this Society. They have a distinct individuality, 
a delicate flavor of their own. Relating wholly to his family, 
and its ancestral home in Boston, and to the recollections 
of his country boyhood, there was in them a freshness of 
feeling as well as a certain honest pride of descent which, to 
say the least, were noticeable as well as suggestive. They 
bespoke the man. 


In a different spirit Mr. Dalton also prepared a memoir of 
I the brother next to him in age, Dr. John Call Dalton, — a pri- 
vately printed family memorial. Of this labor of love I will 
merely say, it is one of the by no means numerous efforts of 
the sort which have left a distinct mark on my recollection. 
It is many years since I read it; and yet, whether because I 
knew the man in a peculiar way, or because the material had 
been used with instinctive judgment and unconscious skill, 
there are passages in that brief memoir which have distinctly 
failed to share, so far as I am concerned, the ordinary fate of 
the extended obituary, — complete mental oblivion. 

With his large connections and constant activities, Mr. 
Dalton, naturally, had occasion during his life to prepare 
many official papers and to print numerous reports ; but with 
the exception of those named, he never made any attempt at 
authorship. It is simply for the few who appreciated those 
privately printed papers to draw the old ex pede inference. 

Mr. Dalton's calling and forte, however, lay indisputably 
in business and in dealing with men. Hi